Roman Lebedev via llvm-dev
2018-Apr-08 18:38 UTC
[llvm-dev] GCC toolchain versioning policy? (D43779)
Hi. As per[1], gcc-4.8 is the oldest supported *major* gcc version. But what about minor/patch versions? When https://reviews.llvm.org/D43779 was initially committed, a few[2][3] buildbots failed. As i have now looked into the issue: * but it is *REPRODUCIBLE* with gcc-4.8.4 and gcc-4.9.2 from debian oldstable (Jessie). * it is *NOT* reproducible with gcc-4.8.5 and gcc-4.9.3 from ubuntu 16.04, So it looks like it was a gcc problem, and it is resolved in latest minor/patch versions. So is there some more specific guideline on minor/patch version requirements? Do we want LLVM to be buildable with all gcc 4.8/4.9 versions? Or is it okay to only build with the latest point versions, that contain the fix? (Regardless, it would be good to have the answer in [1]) Roman. [1] http://llvm.org/docs/GettingStarted.html#host-c-toolchain-both-compiler-and-standard-library [2] http://lab.llvm.org:8011/buildslaves/atom1-buildbot [3] http://lab.llvm.org:8011/buildslaves/ps4-buildslave1a
Roman Lebedev via llvm-dev
2018-Apr-09 11:50 UTC
[llvm-dev] GCC toolchain versioning policy? (D43779)
Hmm, i guess i should have mailed cfe-dev too. Doing that now. On Sun, Apr 8, 2018 at 9:38 PM, Roman Lebedev <lebedev.ri at gmail.com> wrote:> Hi. > > As per[1], gcc-4.8 is the oldest supported *major* gcc version. > But what about minor/patch versions? > > When https://reviews.llvm.org/D43779 was initially committed, > a few[2][3] buildbots failed. As i have now looked into the issue: > * but it is *REPRODUCIBLE* with gcc-4.8.4 and gcc-4.9.2 from debian > oldstable (Jessie). > * it is *NOT* reproducible with gcc-4.8.5 and gcc-4.9.3 from ubuntu 16.04, > So it looks like it was a gcc problem, and it is resolved in latest > minor/patch versions. > > So is there some more specific guideline on minor/patch version requirements? > Do we want LLVM to be buildable with all gcc 4.8/4.9 versions? > Or is it okay to only build with the latest point versions, that > contain the fix? > > (Regardless, it would be good to have the answer in [1]) > > Roman. > > [1] http://llvm.org/docs/GettingStarted.html#host-c-toolchain-both-compiler-and-standard-library > [2] http://lab.llvm.org:8011/buildslaves/atom1-buildbot > [3] http://lab.llvm.org:8011/buildslaves/ps4-buildslave1a
Alexander Kornienko via llvm-dev
2018-Apr-09 16:22 UTC
[llvm-dev] GCC toolchain versioning policy? (D43779)
+ Denis and Galina who should know about the affected buildbots and whether it's fine to upgrade them or whether their configurations reflect some important use cases. Sylvestre should know if the release process for LLVM on Ubuntu/Debian relies on the older GCC toolchains somehow. On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 1:51 PM Roman Lebedev via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:> Hmm, i guess i should have mailed cfe-dev too. Doing that now. > > On Sun, Apr 8, 2018 at 9:38 PM, Roman Lebedev <lebedev.ri at gmail.com> > wrote: > > Hi. > > > > As per[1], gcc-4.8 is the oldest supported *major* gcc version. > > But what about minor/patch versions? > > > > When https://reviews.llvm.org/D43779 was initially committed, > > a few[2][3] buildbots failed. As i have now looked into the issue: > > * but it is *REPRODUCIBLE* with gcc-4.8.4 and gcc-4.9.2 from debian > > oldstable (Jessie). > > * it is *NOT* reproducible with gcc-4.8.5 and gcc-4.9.3 from ubuntu > 16.04, > > So it looks like it was a gcc problem, and it is resolved in latest > > minor/patch versions. > > > > So is there some more specific guideline on minor/patch version > requirements? > > Do we want LLVM to be buildable with all gcc 4.8/4.9 versions? > > Or is it okay to only build with the latest point versions, that > > contain the fix? > > > > (Regardless, it would be good to have the answer in [1]) > > > > Roman. > > > > [1] > http://llvm.org/docs/GettingStarted.html#host-c-toolchain-both-compiler-and-standard-library > > [2] http://lab.llvm.org:8011/buildslaves/atom1-buildbot > > [3] http://lab.llvm.org:8011/buildslaves/ps4-buildslave1a > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20180409/ca74cd3d/attachment.html>
Seemingly Similar Threads
- GCC toolchain versioning policy? (D43779)
- GCC toolchain versioning policy? (D43779)
- buildbot failure in LLVM on sanitizer-x86_64-linux-gn
- Shift-by-signext - sext is bad for analysis - ignore it's use count?
- [cfe-dev] [lldb-dev] RFC: Switching from Bugzilla to Github Issues