Martin Guy
2009-Aug-04 11:22 UTC
[LLVMdev] llvm-gcc-4.2-2.5 fails to build from source on arm: MACHO_DYNAMIC_NO_PIC_P undeclared
On 8/3/09, Anton Korobeynikov <anton at korobeynikov.info> wrote:> > Thanks. Do you have fixes for the other ARM bloopers? This is the > > forthcoming Debian version and it's now dying on arm-gnueabi when it > > links cc1-dummy saying > > Please use the current Top-of-the-Tree version.Sorry, that's not an option as I'm trying to fix the Debian version, which uses "stable" releases. Each Debian build takes 6 hours, so finding and fixing these bugs one by one is quite a long process. llvm-gcc-4.2-2.5 is failing to build from source on arm, sparc, powerpc and ia64, only succeeding on i386 and amd64: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=llvm-gcc-4.2;dist=unstable so it looks like the 2.5 release was never properly tested before it was published. If the issues and fixes are "known", can you make them known to the public, for example by producing a 2.5.1 with the worst bugs fixed, or by documenting the issues and patches in the "Known problems" section? It would be a big help to all the distro maintainers. Thanks & sorry to be the bringer of bad news... M
Anton Korobeynikov
2009-Aug-04 12:33 UTC
[LLVMdev] llvm-gcc-4.2-2.5 fails to build from source on arm: MACHO_DYNAMIC_NO_PIC_P undeclared
Hello, Martin> llvm-gcc-4.2-2.5 is failing to build from source on arm, sparc, > powerpc and ia64, only succeeding on i386 and amd64: > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=llvm-gcc-4.2;dist=unstable > so it looks like the 2.5 release was never properly tested before it > was published.Unfortunately, ia64 and sparc were never considered as a 'tier-1' targets for llvm-gcc, there was noone who cared about it. Also, our linux resources are pretty limited, thus both ppc and arm were broken at the time for 2.5 release. Hopefully things will be much better with the coming 2.6 release, at least one might expect arm and ppc to be more or less ok. ia64 support was completely dropped and sparc should be brokens as of time of 2.5.> If the issues and fixes are "known", can you make them known to the > public, for example by producing a 2.5.1 with the worst bugs fixed, or > by documenting the issues and patches in the "Known problems" section? > It would be a big help to all the distro maintainers.You might want to stick with next 2.6 release, which is scheduled to be out within next 1.5 months I would like to comment on some other bugs as well: 478535: there are no plans to support of legacy IBM S390 platform, only 64 bit one (that's s390x in tartget triple). The current plans are to use clang only, not llvm-gcc, however I might be able to find few hours to give llvm-gcc a try. 539496: There are no plans to support ARMv4 in LLVM. As for ToT ARM builds of llvm-gcc (both for bare-metal arm-elf and normal arm-none-linux-gnueabi triples) is broken due to two PRs: 4680, 4681 511721: I believe it should be fixed on ToT. 518592: Sounds like compiler / linker problem, it's not LLVM related at all -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University
Martin Guy
2009-Aug-04 13:40 UTC
[LLVMdev] llvm-gcc-4.2-2.5 fails to build from source on arm: MACHO_DYNAMIC_NO_PIC_P undeclared
On 8/4/09, Anton Korobeynikov <anton at korobeynikov.info> wrote:> both ppc and arm were broken at the time for 2.5 release.Ah, OK, thanks. That resolves my problem! :) I've edited your remarks and appended them to the debian bug report, which should solve the issue, see bugs.debian.org/539496> I would like to comment on some other bugs as well: > 478535: there are no plans to support of legacy IBM S390 platform, > only 64 bit one (that's s390x in tartget triple). The current plans > are to use clang only, not llvm-gcc, however I might be able to find > few hours to give llvm-gcc a try. > 539496: There are no plans to support ARMv4 in LLVM. As for ToT ARM > builds of llvm-gcc (both for bare-metal arm-elf and normal > arm-none-linux-gnueabi triples) is broken due to two PRs: 4680, 4681 > 511721: I believe it should be fixed on ToT. > 518592: Sounds like compiler / linker problem, it's not LLVM related at allThanks. I've forwarded these comments to the bug tracker. In general. anyone can add comments to Debian bug reports simply by sending email to 478535 at bugs.debian.org or whatever With respect to 539496, yes, all major distributions are moving to ARM EABI, for which the minimum architecture is armv4t, while armv4 is becoming rare. But if you also mean "no plans to support ARMv4t", I would say that it is currently very common in small devices where a compiler with a small memory requirement and producing compact object code is most valuable. Exmples: the openmoko linux phone and the many single-board ARM computers currently on the market. The only incompatability that ARMv5t causes is the extra count-leading-zeros instruction, which is seldom useful to a compiler except in asm code for division - a small gain - so I would urge LLVM to continue support for ARMv4t unless there are compelling reasons not to do so. But I may have misunderstood you. Re: resources, there is a 600MHz 512MB ARM (v5t) here, as well as a little armv4t board, which are on 24/7 and which I am happy for people to use over ssh to debug arm and arm-eabi issues. If that would be useful to anyone, just send mail privately suggesting a username Thanks again M
Tanya Lattner
2009-Aug-19 23:30 UTC
[LLVMdev] llvm-gcc-4.2-2.5 fails to build from source on arm: MACHO_DYNAMIC_NO_PIC_P undeclared
On Aug 4, 2009, at 5:33 AM, Anton Korobeynikov wrote:> Hello, Martin > >> llvm-gcc-4.2-2.5 is failing to build from source on arm, sparc, >> powerpc and ia64, only succeeding on i386 and amd64: >> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=llvm-gcc-4.2;dist=unstable >> so it looks like the 2.5 release was never properly tested before it >> was published. > Unfortunately, ia64 and sparc were never considered as a 'tier-1' > targets for llvm-gcc, there was noone who cared about it. Also, our > linux resources are pretty limited, thus both ppc and arm were broken > at the time for 2.5 release. > > Hopefully things will be much better with the coming 2.6 release, at > least one might expect arm and ppc to be more or less ok. ia64 support > was completely dropped and sparc should be brokens as of time of 2.5. >I just want to comment on this. We test our releases very throughly for supported targets. Supported means that they are actively maintained and tested day after day. If no one steps up to be a maintainer for these targets, then they will not become a part of the release criteria. With that said, we only qualified for x86-32, x86-64, mingw32, and ppc (mac os 10.5 only). So pretty much all the ones that are failing were not supported for 2.5. This list is only slightly expanded for 2.6, and will not include arm, ia64, sparc, or ppc. arm will probably work with 2.5, but unless someone wants to qualify it for the release (I do not have a volunteer), then it will not be on the list of supported targets. We'd love help with these targets. Ideally, we need someone to set up an appropriate buildbot and actively monitor it and fix issues or file bug reports for things that come up. Thanks, Tanya>> If the issues and fixes are "known", can you make them known to the >> public, for example by producing a 2.5.1 with the worst bugs fixed, >> or >> by documenting the issues and patches in the "Known problems" >> section? >> It would be a big help to all the distro maintainers. > You might want to stick with next 2.6 release, which is scheduled to > be out within next 1.5 months > > I would like to comment on some other bugs as well: > 478535: there are no plans to support of legacy IBM S390 platform, > only 64 bit one (that's s390x in tartget triple). The current plans > are to use clang only, not llvm-gcc, however I might be able to find > few hours to give llvm-gcc a try. > 539496: There are no plans to support ARMv4 in LLVM. As for ToT ARM > builds of llvm-gcc (both for bare-metal arm-elf and normal > arm-none-linux-gnueabi triples) is broken due to two PRs: 4680, 4681 > 511721: I believe it should be fixed on ToT. > 518592: Sounds like compiler / linker problem, it's not LLVM related > at all > > -- > With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov > Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State > University > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20090819/6f00bb7d/attachment.html>
Reasonably Related Threads
- [LLVMdev] llvm-gcc-4.2-2.5 fails to build from source on arm: MACHO_DYNAMIC_NO_PIC_P undeclared
- [LLVMdev] llvm-gcc-4.2-2.5 fails to build from source on arm: MACHO_DYNAMIC_NO_PIC_P undeclared
- [LLVMdev] llvm-gcc-4.2-2.5 fails to build from source on arm: MACHO_DYNAMIC_NO_PIC_P undeclared
- [LLVMdev] llvm-gcc-4.2-2.5 fails to build from source on arm: MACHO_DYNAMIC_NO_PIC_P undeclared
- [LLVMdev] llvm-gcc-4.2-2.5 fails to build from source on arm: MACHO_DYNAMIC_NO_PIC_P undeclared