search for: gccpath

...that the CC, CFLAGS, CXX, and CXXFLAGS settings are not reflected in the site.exp file. I had CC=gcc-4.2 CFLAGS="-m32 -Wl,-melf_i386" CXX=g++-4.2 CXXFLAGS=$CFLAGS ARCH=i686-pc-linux-gnu ./configure --prefix=$HOME --target=$ARCH --host=$ARCH --build=$ARCH but site.exp still has set gccpath "gcc" set gxxpath "g++" and no mention of -m32 or -Wl,elf_i386 (these options are required to force a 64-bit GNU toolchain into 32-bit mode). I don't know where these options are lost; I did a little looking around in the configure scripts, but didn't find any obvious...

Hi all again, llvm is failing the 2006-11-30-NoCompileUnit and 2006-11-30-Pubnames tests on me. -m32 and --disable-multilib didn't change the outcome. Did I get the command wrong? I tried jo at kurier:~/Delta/llvm/test$ CFLAGS=--multilib make check See below for a transcript of the failed check. What next? Regards, Jo -- snip -- jo at kurier:~/Delta/llvm/test$ make check llvm[0]:

...settings are not > reflected in the site.exp file. I had > CC=gcc-4.2 > CFLAGS="-m32 -Wl,-melf_i386" > CXX=g++-4.2 > CXXFLAGS=$CFLAGS > ARCH=i686-pc-linux-gnu > ./configure --prefix=$HOME --target=$ARCH --host=$ARCH --build=$ARCH > but site.exp still has > set gccpath "gcc" > set gxxpath "g++" > and no mention of -m32 or -Wl,elf_i386 (these options are required to > force a 64-bit GNU toolchain into 32-bit mode). > > I don't know where these options are lost; I did a little looking > around > in the configure scrip...

Hi, I downloaded and installed the front-end (llvm-gcc 4), and downloaded, configured, and built llvm-2.0 using -prefix=[myllvmPath] and -with-llvmgccdir=[llvm-gccPath] When I try to use sparc as target, llvm-gcc does not recognize it. I used -march=sparc and it gives two errors: "bad value (sparc) for -march= switch" "bad value (sparc) for -mtune= switch" I used -bsparc as argument to llvm-gcc and it gives the following error: Llv...

...igure, by using llvm-gcc. With configure, it was fixable for the whole toolchain by saying --target=i686, so there is hope. Unfortunately, make check doesn't seem to use the setting from ./configure; this is what I see in site.exp, regardless of any CC= or CFLAGS= settings on make check: set gccpath "gcc" set gxxpath "g++" Should I edit site.exp to fix that, or is there a better way? Regards, Jo

On Feb 27, 2008, at 2:12 PM, Joachim Durchholz wrote: > Some additional info: > > I just found the .s files mentioned in the error message, and checked > them. All error messages refer to one of the following four > instructions: > pushl %ebp > pushl %esi > popl %ebp > popl %esi > It's always the same error, "suffix or operands invalid for >

...igure, it was fixable for the whole toolchain by saying > --target=i686, so there is hope. > > Unfortunately, make check doesn't seem to use the setting > from ./configure; this is what I see in site.exp, regardless of any > CC= > or CFLAGS= settings on make check: > set gccpath "gcc" > set gxxpath "g++" > > Should I edit site.exp to fix that, or is there a better way?

...(llvm) sed: -e expression #1, char 9: unterminated `s' command CHANGE HISTORY ANALYSIS STAGE Rev: 48038, Author: void, Date: 2008-03-07, Time: 23:45:15 Rev: 48041, Author: djg, Date: 2008-03-08, Time: 00:19:12 4) Further testing crashed&burned because NewNightlyTest.pl doesn't pass on -gccpath "gcc-4.2 -m32" as a single argument to ./configure. I don't consider this a serious bug, I'll try with -gccflags/-gxxflags/-ldflags tomorrow. 5) I accidentally had the script enter my machine (named "kurier") into the nightly tester database, it seems. Please ignore any...

...the whole toolchain by saying >> --target=i686, so there is hope. >> >> Unfortunately, make check doesn't seem to use the setting >> from ./configure; this is what I see in site.exp, regardless of any >> CC= >> or CFLAGS= settings on make check: >> set gccpath "gcc" >> set gxxpath "g++" >> >> Should I edit site.exp to fix that, or is there a better way? > I'm coming into this late so I'm not really sure what's going on, but you can pass options to dejagnu pretty easily using RUNTESTFLAGS. That aside...