similar to: Fw: Suffix or Operands invalid during AMD64 compile

Hi all, I am trying to compile Wine 0.9.32 from source on an AMD64 desktop running Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4. I configure as follows: % ./configure --prefix=/home/mfuhrer/sw/linux --with-x --enable-wine64 This works fine. I run make depend, followed by make, and get the following error: % make make[1]: Entering directory `/mnt/io/home/mfuhrer/sw/src/wine-0.9.32/tools' make[1]:

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 `push'" (resp `pop'). There are no other push or pop instructions in any .s file.

> > cd test > make > has > Target is i686-pc-none > Host is x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu > which means it knows that it is running on amd64 (host = x86_64) and > deals with compilers emitting code for 32 bit (target = i686). > > I suspect it should pass on the target=i686 option to `as' and `ld', > but > doesn't. Aaah. Try: .../configure

Joachim Durchholz wrote: > Since llvm cannot generate code for amd64 at this time, this translates > to an additional constraint on --target, restricting me to --target=i686 > only. llvm can generate code for amd64, but shared libs don't work, and bootstrapping doesn't work (PR1711). Still, if you want to compile it as 32-bit, does it work if you run configure like this (without

Am Mittwoch, den 05.03.2008, 23:03 -0800 schrieb Chris Lattner: > On Mar 3, 2008, at 2:49 AM, Joachim Durchholz wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > I found enough to explain the behaviour that I encountered. If I'm > > correct, the bugs are just in the dejagnu-based test machinery, not in > > LLVM itself. > > Yep, I believe that. I haven't been

Am Mittwoch, den 27.02.2008, 14:31 -0800 schrieb Dale Johannesen: > On Feb 27, 2008, at 2:12 PM, Joachim Durchholz wrote: > > 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 > >

Hi Eric, Am Freitag, den 29.02.2008, 15:02 -0800 schrieb Eric Christopher: > I'm coming into this late so I'm not really sure what's going on, In a nutshell, I'm trying to get llvm to run on my amd64 Linux box. Problem is that various tools are activated in 64-bit mode even though I try to convince everybody to play fair with llvm and use 32 bits. (I gather llvm doesn't

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 >

On Feb 29, 2008, at 4:05 PM, Joachim Durchholz wrote: > > Am Freitag, den 29.02.2008, 15:37 -0800 schrieb Eric Christopher: >> Aaah. Try: >> >> .../configure --host=i686-pc-linux-gnu --target=i686-pc-linux-gnu >> >> and see if that works. If it doesn't it may need some more configure >> love, but it might happen. > > Good to read that! I was

Hi all, I found enough to explain the behaviour that I encountered. If I'm correct, the bugs are just in the dejagnu-based test machinery, not in LLVM itself. There seem to be two issues: Issue 1 is 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

Am Freitag, den 29.02.2008, 15:37 -0800 schrieb Eric Christopher: > Aaah. Try: > > .../configure --host=i686-pc-linux-gnu --target=i686-pc-linux-gnu > > and see if that works. If it doesn't it may need some more configure > love, but it might happen. Good to read that! I was slowly approaching despair. Seems to make a *far* slower compile though. Or it's compiling

On Mar 3, 2008, at 2:49 AM, Joachim Durchholz wrote: > Hi all, > > I found enough to explain the behaviour that I encountered. If I'm > correct, the bugs are just in the dejagnu-based test machinery, not in > LLVM itself. Yep, I believe that. I haven't been following the whole thread very closely, what specific tests are affected here? Before making any significant and

>>> >>> Those are valid instructions in every x86-32 assembler I'm aware of. >>> Perhaps it needs a switch to put it in 32-bit mode? >> >> Yes, I have been able to confirm that's what's happening behind the >> scene. The switch would be --32, however after that, ld will try to >> link >> the 64-bit versions of libc and the C

Am Samstag, den 01.03.2008, 10:57 -0800 schrieb Chris Lattner: > > # Configure & install > > $ cd llvm-2.2 > > # I'm trying the --build option, too. > > $ ./configure --prefix=$HOME CC=gcc-4.2 CXX=g++-4.2 \ > > --build=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu \ > > --host=i686-pc-linux-gnu --target=i686-pc-linux-gnu > > This is probably the problem. It sounds like

> # Configure & install > $ cd llvm-2.2 > # I'm trying the --build option, too. > $ ./configure --prefix=$HOME CC=gcc-4.2 CXX=g++-4.2 \ > --build=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu \ > --host=i686-pc-linux-gnu --target=i686-pc-linux-gnu This is probably the problem. It sounds like you have llvm-gcc building for x86-64 (so the compiler defaults to emitting x86-64 code) but your

I do not know the configury stuff well enough to answer this, can someone else help? On Feb 28, 2008, at 1:55 AM, Joachim Durchholz wrote: > Am Mittwoch, den 27.02.2008, 14:31 -0800 schrieb Dale Johannesen: >> On Feb 27, 2008, at 2:12 PM, Joachim Durchholz wrote: >>> All error messages refer to one of the following four >>> instructions: >>> pushl %ebp

Am Freitag, den 29.02.2008, 18:15 -0800 schrieb Eric Christopher: > Is this configuring llvm or llvm-gcc? This is inside the llvm-2.2 directory. > Seems to work just fine for > configure; make; make check with llvm. Trying "make check" from the llvm directory instead of "make" from llvm/test... doesn't work. Retrying from scratch, here's the transcript:

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]:

the ford cd is backwards --- wine-users-request@winehq.org wrote: > Send wine-users mailing list submissions to > wine-users@winehq.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide > Web, visit > > http://www.winehq.org/mailman/listinfo/wine-users > or, via email, send a message with subject or > body 'help' to > wine-users-request@winehq.org >

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2004 00:31:21 -0400 From: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com> To: politech@politechbot.com Subject: [Politech] House bill exports analog phone regs to VoIP http://www.politechbot.com/docs/boucher.voip.bill.070604.pdf There's a new bill in the House of Representatives to regulate phone calls made over the Internet. It was