Opened 19 years ago
Closed 18 years ago
#1579 closed defect (fixed)
GCC-4.0.3 fixes
| Reported by: | Owned by: | Randy McMurchy | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | high | Milestone: | 6.2.0 |
| Component: | BOOK | Version: | SVN |
| Severity: | normal | Keywords: | GCC |
| Cc: |
Description (last modified by )
LFS is now using GCC-4.0.1 in SVN trunk, which means BLFS now needs to use GCC-4.0.1 as our target build. There are many patches that need to go into the book to fix various packages.
Change History (11)
comment:1 by , 19 years ago
| Milestone: | future → 6.2 |
|---|---|
| Severity: | normal → blocker |
| Status: | new → assigned |
comment:2 by , 19 years ago
| Owner: | changed from to |
|---|---|
| Severity: | blocker → major |
| Status: | assigned → new |
comment:3 by , 19 years ago
| Summary: | GCC-4.0.1 fixes → GCC-4.0.2 fixes |
|---|
comment:4 by , 18 years ago
| dependson: | → 1648 |
|---|
comment:5 by , 18 years ago
| dependson: | → 1590 |
|---|
comment:6 by , 18 years ago
| Description: | modified (diff) |
|---|---|
| Keywords: | GCC added |
| Severity: | major → normal |
| Summary: | GCC-4.0.2 fixes → GCC-4.0.3 fixes |
Bruce (you may be the only one to remember this), so your comment is especially welcome.
This ticket should probably stay open until right before the 6.2 book is released, or all BLFS is known to work with the current GCC.
I can create an interactive web page that has check boxes for all the BLFS packages, when a package is known to be good, you check the box. All (and only) Editors can update it, it saves the history, uses locking so that multiple updates can happen simultaneously, etc, etc.
It worked fairly well for the 6.1 release of BLFS and the CGI would just take a few minutes to set up on a different server than it was before. I believe I can automate the creation of the data file.
Does doing this again seem worthwhile, it seemed to be a good method of keeping track what works and what does not last time?
comment:7 by , 18 years ago
| Owner: | changed from to |
|---|---|
| Status: | new → assigned |
I'm going to accept this ticket and update the book to gcc-4.0.3. After update this ticket will be closed and any problems with other packages not working should result in a new ticket against that package.
comment:8 by , 18 years ago
Bruce,
There is a separate ticket (#1844) for the GCC update. It is assigned to me and I am currently right in the middle of it. I will close that ticket later this evening after the book is updated.
There's probably no reason this ticket can't be closed now.
comment:9 by , 18 years ago
| Owner: | changed from to |
|---|---|
| Status: | assigned → new |
Reassigning to do in conjunction with #1844 in accordance with Rany's request.
comment:10 by , 18 years ago
I don't see any relationship between a GCC-4.0.x package failures bug and updating from from GCC-4.0.2 to 4.0.3, but no big deal.
In fact, there is no relationship whatsoever. The bug was started for packages that failed to compile using GCC-4.0.1. The BLFS book is beyond that already. The packages that fail to compile aren't specific to the version of GCC-4.0.x. It is just that they don't compile with *any* 4.x.x compiler.
As far as I'm concerned, this bug (1579) can be closed now, and as soon as I update the book to GCC-4.0.3, I'll close 1844.
They are totally independant, and after I close #1844, it makes no influence on #1579.
comment:11 by , 18 years ago
| Resolution: | → fixed |
|---|---|
| Status: | new → closed |
Marking fixed because we don't have a resolution status of overcome-by-events.
Many of the BLFS packages are now updated with fixes to use GCC-4. There are still some patches that need to be added, (PAN and GPDF patches are in the LFS repo), but many of the major packages are now fixed.
Downgrading the bug, and reassigning to BLFS-Book. The rest of the BLFS packages will just need to be fixed as we go along. The bug should probably be left open until all of BLFS is known to compile using GCC-4.x