pcc 1.1 alpha release any time soon?

[ольга крыжановская]

I have a request: given the huge process pcc has made, since the 1.0
release, can you release an *alpha* release of pcc 1.1, so the Linux
distributions pick that up, please? OpenSUSE12.3 still ships with
pcc1.0, which is a pain.

Olga

[Irek Szczesniak]

On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 3:24 PM, ольга крыжановская

Post by ольга крыжановская
I have a request: given the huge process pcc has made, since the 1.0
release, can you release an *alpha* release of pcc 1.1, so the Linux
distributions pick that up, please? OpenSUSE12.3 still ships with
pcc1.0, which is a pain.

+1 on the alpha idea

Also a big -100000 on the current pcc1.0 in Suse and Fedora. Both is
IMO a pain. I think everyone here will agree with that in 2013 (pcc
1.0 was great in April 2011 but time moved on).

Irek

[Susi Lehtola]

On Mon, 8 Apr 2013 16:59:40 +0200

Post by Irek Szczesniak
On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 3:24 PM, ольга крыжановская

Post by ольга крыжановская
I have a request: given the huge process pcc has made, since the 1.0
release, can you release an *alpha* release of pcc 1.1, so the Linux
distributions pick that up, please? OpenSUSE12.3 still ships with
pcc1.0, which is a pain.

+1 on the alpha idea
Also a big -100000 on the current pcc1.0 in Suse and Fedora. Both is
IMO a pain. I think everyone here will agree with that in 2013 (pcc
1.0 was great in April 2011 but time moved on).

First of all, pcc in Fedora is from November 2011.

Secondly, before a pcc 1.1 release I would like to get pcc working on
linux once again. As I reported in December, for some reason binaries
compiled with current versions of gcc don't return the right value -
return 0 ends up returning 96.

[Irek Szczesniak]

On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 7:00 PM, Susi Lehtola

Post by Susi Lehtola
On Mon, 8 Apr 2013 16:59:40 +0200

Post by Irek Szczesniak
On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 3:24 PM, ольга крыжановская

Post by ольга крыжановская
I have a request: given the huge process pcc has made, since the 1.0
release, can you release an *alpha* release of pcc 1.1, so the Linux
distributions pick that up, please? OpenSUSE12.3 still ships with
pcc1.0, which is a pain.

+1 on the alpha idea
Also a big -100000 on the current pcc1.0 in Suse and Fedora. Both is
IMO a pain. I think everyone here will agree with that in 2013 (pcc
1.0 was great in April 2011 but time moved on).

First of all, pcc in Fedora is from November 2011.
Secondly, before a pcc 1.1 release I would like to get pcc working on
linux once again. As I reported in December, for some reason binaries
compiled with current versions of gcc don't return the right value -
return 0 ends up returning 96.

Does this happen for pcc binaries compiled with pcc itself? Does gcc
report any suspicious warnings? Does valgrind report anything? Can you
bisect the source repository commits to narrow down the commit which
caused the break?

Irek

[Susi Lehtola]

On Mon, 8 Apr 2013 19:39:21 +0200

Post by Irek Szczesniak

Post by Susi Lehtola
Secondly, before a pcc 1.1 release I would like to get pcc working
on linux once again. As I reported in December, for some reason
binaries compiled with current versions of gcc don't return the
right value - return 0 ends up returning 96.

Does this happen for pcc binaries compiled with pcc itself? Does gcc
report any suspicious warnings? Does valgrind report anything? Can you
bisect the source repository commits to narrow down the commit which
caused the break?

I can't compile pcc with pcc itself since pcc compiled with gcc.

I'll try bisecting as soon as the www server gets back up.

[Anders Magnusson]

Hello,
Ishttp://pcc.ludd.ltu.se/mailing_lists/ down?
I'm trying to change my subscription e-mail?

Up now.

Either do as it is written there or mail me.

-- Ragge

[Susi Lehtola]

Post by Susi Lehtola
On Mon, 8 Apr 2013 19:39:21 +0200

Post by Irek Szczesniak

Post by Susi Lehtola
Secondly, before a pcc 1.1 release I would like to get pcc working
on linux once again. As I reported in December, for some reason
binaries compiled with current versions of gcc don't return the
right value - return 0 ends up returning 96.

Does this happen for pcc binaries compiled with pcc itself? Does gcc
report any suspicious warnings? Does valgrind report anything? Can you
bisect the source repository commits to narrow down the commit which
caused the break?

I can't compile pcc with pcc itself since pcc compiled with gcc.
I'll try bisecting as soon as the www server gets back up.

I have now done the bisection, and here are its results. The procedure
is:
1. download pcc and pcc-libs tarballs of the chosen date
2. compile pcc and pcc-libs with gcc
3. recompile pcc and pcc-libs with pcc (compiled with gcc)
4. recompile pcc and pcc-libs with pcc (compiled with pcc)

Results:

20120210 works
20120710 works

20120711 major internal compiler error, cc.c line 1422
20120713 major internal compiler error
20120717 major internal compiler error
20120725 major internal compiler error
20120801 major internal compiler error
20120804 major internal compiler error

20120806 ar: softfloat.o: No such file or directory

20120807 configure: error: cannot run C compiled programs.
20120808 fail
20120810 fail

20120910 fail,
pcc -I. -DTARGET_LITTLE_ENDIAN=1 -Dos_linux -isystem ../libpcc/include
-Iamd64 -Ilinux -I. -g -c cmpdi2.c
quad.h, line 134: redeclaration of __ashldi3
quad.h, line 135: redeclaration of __ashrdi3
quad.h, line 147: redeclaration of __lshrdi3
/usr/libexec/ccom terminated with status 1

20120110 fail
20121216 fail


So it would seem that the problem was introduced either in the
rework between 20120710 and 20120711, or in the fix of the resulting
compiler error.

When the compiler starts to work again in 20120807, configure fails
because the binaries produced by pcc (compiled with gcc) give out a
wrong error code - return 0 ends up returning something like 96...
--
Susi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
***@fedoraproject.org

[Irek Szczesniak]

On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Susi Lehtola

Post by Susi Lehtola

Post by Susi Lehtola
On Mon, 8 Apr 2013 19:39:21 +0200

Post by Irek Szczesniak

Post by Susi Lehtola
Secondly, before a pcc 1.1 release I would like to get pcc working
on linux once again. As I reported in December, for some reason
binaries compiled with current versions of gcc don't return the
right value - return 0 ends up returning 96.

Does this happen for pcc binaries compiled with pcc itself? Does gcc
report any suspicious warnings? Does valgrind report anything? Can you
bisect the source repository commits to narrow down the commit which
caused the break?

I can't compile pcc with pcc itself since pcc compiled with gcc.
I'll try bisecting as soon as the www server gets back up.

I have now done the bisection, and here are its results. The procedure
1. download pcc and pcc-libs tarballs of the chosen date
2. compile pcc and pcc-libs with gcc
3. recompile pcc and pcc-libs with pcc (compiled with gcc)
4. recompile pcc and pcc-libs with pcc (compiled with pcc)
20120210 works
20120710 works
20120711 major internal compiler error, cc.c line 1422
20120713 major internal compiler error
20120717 major internal compiler error
20120725 major internal compiler error
20120801 major internal compiler error
20120804 major internal compiler error
20120806 ar: softfloat.o: No such file or directory
20120807 configure: error: cannot run C compiled programs.
20120808 fail
20120810 fail
20120910 fail,
pcc -I. -DTARGET_LITTLE_ENDIAN=1 -Dos_linux -isystem ../libpcc/include
-Iamd64 -Ilinux -I. -g -c cmpdi2.c
quad.h, line 134: redeclaration of __ashldi3
quad.h, line 135: redeclaration of __ashrdi3
quad.h, line 147: redeclaration of __lshrdi3
/usr/libexec/ccom terminated with status 1
20120110 fail
20121216 fail
So it would seem that the problem was introduced either in the
rework between 20120710 and 20120711, or in the fix of the resulting
compiler error.
When the compiler starts to work again in 20120807, configure fails
because the binaries produced by pcc (compiled with gcc) give out a
wrong error code - return 0 ends up returning something like 96...

Anders, have you looked at Susi's feedback?

Irek

[Anders Magnusson]

Post by Irek Szczesniak
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Susi Lehtola

Post by Susi Lehtola

Post by Susi Lehtola
On Mon, 8 Apr 2013 19:39:21 +0200

Post by Irek Szczesniak

Post by Susi Lehtola
Secondly, before a pcc 1.1 release I would like to get pcc working
on linux once again. As I reported in December, for some reason
binaries compiled with current versions of gcc don't return the
right value - return 0 ends up returning 96.

Does this happen for pcc binaries compiled with pcc itself? Does gcc
report any suspicious warnings? Does valgrind report anything? Can you
bisect the source repository commits to narrow down the commit which
caused the break?

I can't compile pcc with pcc itself since pcc compiled with gcc.
I'll try bisecting as soon as the www server gets back up.

I have now done the bisection, and here are its results. The procedure
1. download pcc and pcc-libs tarballs of the chosen date
2. compile pcc and pcc-libs with gcc
3. recompile pcc and pcc-libs with pcc (compiled with gcc)
4. recompile pcc and pcc-libs with pcc (compiled with pcc)
20120210 works
20120710 works
20120711 major internal compiler error, cc.c line 1422
20120713 major internal compiler error
20120717 major internal compiler error
20120725 major internal compiler error
20120801 major internal compiler error
20120804 major internal compiler error
20120806 ar: softfloat.o: No such file or directory
20120807 configure: error: cannot run C compiled programs.
20120808 fail
20120810 fail
20120910 fail,
pcc -I. -DTARGET_LITTLE_ENDIAN=1 -Dos_linux -isystem ../libpcc/include
-Iamd64 -Ilinux -I. -g -c cmpdi2.c
quad.h, line 134: redeclaration of __ashldi3
quad.h, line 135: redeclaration of __ashrdi3
quad.h, line 147: redeclaration of __lshrdi3
/usr/libexec/ccom terminated with status 1
20120110 fail
20121216 fail
So it would seem that the problem was introduced either in the
rework between 20120710 and 20120711, or in the fix of the resulting
compiler error.
When the compiler starts to work again in 20120807, configure fails
because the binaries produced by pcc (compiled with gcc) give out a
wrong error code - return 0 ends up returning something like 96...

Anders, have you looked at Susi's feedback?

Yep, but I do not have even remotely any time to get deeper into it for
a while.

-- Ragge

[Susi Lehtola]

On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 19:33:46 +0200

Post by Irek Szczesniak
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Susi Lehtola

Post by Susi Lehtola
I have now done the bisection, and here are its results. The procedure
1. download pcc and pcc-libs tarballs of the chosen date
2. compile pcc and pcc-libs with gcc
3. recompile pcc and pcc-libs with pcc (compiled with gcc)
4. recompile pcc and pcc-libs with pcc (compiled with pcc)
20120210 works
20120710 works
20120711 major internal compiler error, cc.c line 1422
20120713 major internal compiler error
20120717 major internal compiler error
20120725 major internal compiler error
20120801 major internal compiler error
20120804 major internal compiler error
20120806 ar: softfloat.o: No such file or directory
20120807 configure: error: cannot run C compiled programs.
20120808 fail
20120810 fail
20120910 fail,
pcc -I. -DTARGET_LITTLE_ENDIAN=1 -Dos_linux -isystem ../libpcc/include
-Iamd64 -Ilinux -I. -g -c cmpdi2.c
quad.h, line 134: redeclaration of __ashldi3
quad.h, line 135: redeclaration of __ashrdi3
quad.h, line 147: redeclaration of __lshrdi3
/usr/libexec/ccom terminated with status 1
20120110 fail
20121216 fail
So it would seem that the problem was introduced either in the
rework between 20120710 and 20120711, or in the fix of the resulting
compiler error.
When the compiler starts to work again in 20120807, configure fails
because the binaries produced by pcc (compiled with gcc) give out a
wrong error code - return 0 ends up returning something like 96...

Anders, have you looked at Susi's feedback?

Any progress with this?

[Anders Magnusson]

Post by Susi Lehtola
On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 19:33:46 +0200

Post by Irek Szczesniak
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Susi Lehtola

Post by Susi Lehtola
I have now done the bisection, and here are its results. The procedure
1. download pcc and pcc-libs tarballs of the chosen date
2. compile pcc and pcc-libs with gcc
3. recompile pcc and pcc-libs with pcc (compiled with gcc)
4. recompile pcc and pcc-libs with pcc (compiled with pcc)
20120210 works
20120710 works
20120711 major internal compiler error, cc.c line 1422
20120713 major internal compiler error
20120717 major internal compiler error
20120725 major internal compiler error
20120801 major internal compiler error
20120804 major internal compiler error
20120806 ar: softfloat.o: No such file or directory
20120807 configure: error: cannot run C compiled programs.
20120808 fail
20120810 fail
20120910 fail,
pcc -I. -DTARGET_LITTLE_ENDIAN=1 -Dos_linux -isystem ../libpcc/include
-Iamd64 -Ilinux -I. -g -c cmpdi2.c
quad.h, line 134: redeclaration of __ashldi3
quad.h, line 135: redeclaration of __ashrdi3
quad.h, line 147: redeclaration of __lshrdi3
/usr/libexec/ccom terminated with status 1
20120110 fail
20121216 fail
So it would seem that the problem was introduced either in the
rework between 20120710 and 20120711, or in the fix of the resulting
compiler error.
When the compiler starts to work again in 20120807, configure fails
because the binaries produced by pcc (compiled with gcc) give out a
wrong error code - return 0 ends up returning something like 96...

Anders, have you looked at Susi's feedback?

Any progress with this?

I'll install the latest fedora and at last debug this soon.

-- Ragge

[Anders Magnusson]

Post by Susi Lehtola
On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 19:33:46 +0200

Post by Susi Lehtola
When the compiler starts to work again in 20120807, configure fails
because the binaries produced by pcc (compiled with gcc) give out a
wrong error code - return 0 ends up returning something like 96...
Anders, have you looked at Susi's feedback?

Any progress with this?

Hi,

I just tried to install Fedora 20 on ESXi 5.1, but it just hangs when
the graphical install interface pops up.
Some googeling tells that others also have had this problem but I could
not find a solution.

Are there some magic key combination that gets a command-line install
environment instead of the graphic goo?
I would really like to spend my time on pcc hacking instead of fighting
fedora installation problem...

-- Ragge

[Anders Magnusson]

I managed to get fedora 20 running (amd64).

I recompiled pcc with itself two times, and it worked fine afterwards.
So I cannot reproduce this...?

-- Ragge

Post by Susi Lehtola
On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 19:33:46 +0200

Post by Irek Szczesniak
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Susi Lehtola

Post by Susi Lehtola
I have now done the bisection, and here are its results. The procedure
1. download pcc and pcc-libs tarballs of the chosen date
2. compile pcc and pcc-libs with gcc
3. recompile pcc and pcc-libs with pcc (compiled with gcc)
4. recompile pcc and pcc-libs with pcc (compiled with pcc)
20120210 works
20120710 works
20120711 major internal compiler error, cc.c line 1422
20120713 major internal compiler error
20120717 major internal compiler error
20120725 major internal compiler error
20120801 major internal compiler error
20120804 major internal compiler error
20120806 ar: softfloat.o: No such file or directory
20120807 configure: error: cannot run C compiled programs.
20120808 fail
20120810 fail
20120910 fail,
pcc -I. -DTARGET_LITTLE_ENDIAN=1 -Dos_linux -isystem ../libpcc/include
-Iamd64 -Ilinux -I. -g -c cmpdi2.c
quad.h, line 134: redeclaration of __ashldi3
quad.h, line 135: redeclaration of __ashrdi3
quad.h, line 147: redeclaration of __lshrdi3
/usr/libexec/ccom terminated with status 1
20120110 fail
20121216 fail
So it would seem that the problem was introduced either in the
rework between 20120710 and 20120711, or in the fix of the resulting
compiler error.
When the compiler starts to work again in 20120807, configure fails
because the binaries produced by pcc (compiled with gcc) give out a
wrong error code - return 0 ends up returning something like 96...

Anders, have you looked at Susi's feedback?

Any progress with this?

[Susi Lehtola]

On Sat, 19 Apr 2014 13:56:16 +0200

Post by Anders Magnusson
I managed to get fedora 20 running (amd64).
I recompiled pcc with itself two times, and it worked fine afterwards.
So I cannot reproduce this...?

As I said in JIRA, I was able to determine that the return value bug
exhibits itself only when the -O2 flag (or higher) is used with gcc to
compile pcc.

Because it used to work before, there's some bug that has been
introduced in 2012 that broke the code.

If you compile with -Wall -Wextra you also see some compiler warnings
about the use of implicit functions and so on.

[Irek Szczesniak]

On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 7:51 PM, Susi Lehtola

Post by Susi Lehtola
On Mon, 8 Apr 2013 19:39:21 +0200

Post by Irek Szczesniak

Post by Susi Lehtola
Secondly, before a pcc 1.1 release I would like to get pcc working
on linux once again. As I reported in December, for some reason
binaries compiled with current versions of gcc don't return the
right value - return 0 ends up returning 96.

Does this happen for pcc binaries compiled with pcc itself? Does gcc
report any suspicious warnings? Does valgrind report anything? Can you
bisect the source repository commits to narrow down the commit which
caused the break?

I can't compile pcc with pcc itself since pcc compiled with gcc.
I'll try bisecting as soon as the www server gets back up.

Thank you for your help!

Irek