5.0.1 test failures on alphaev56-dec-osf4.0g (Tru64)

[Daniel Richard G.]

On Tue, 2010 Sep  7 20:33+0200, Torbjorn Granlund wrote:
>
> Please use gdb to see which exact instruction fails.

I thought I'd provided that information already. Should I attach the
preprocessed .s file?

> Is it a shared build or a static build that fails?  (Passing --disable-
> shared to configure will make sure the build uses just static linking,
> passing --disable-static will make sure it is shared.)

This is a static-only build, as the later GCC build will be built with a
static libgcc. (I'm also using --with-pic, but the same failures result
without that.)

Interestingly, a shared-only build passes all tests.

> Please see which assembler is being used.  A command like "gcc -v
> foo.c" will tell you that.  It is also possible that the assembly is
> behaving, but that the linker is misbehaving.

I just see an invocation of plain "as" in there. If the problem is
down to the linker, however, this would be the only instance of it
that I'm aware of.

> It is possible for us to support the assembler since it is clearly can
> handle lots of code spit out by the compilers.  We need to understand
> what of our file it dislikes, and then what we could feed it instead
> to make it happy.
>
> By generating a little C code function and compile that to assembly,
> we could figure out what to do.
>
> Note that we might in the end decide to not work around this issue,
> since osf4 is considered obsolete.  It might be wiser that you install
> a better assembler, or install a current OS...

Surely this is something simple enough! Would you want to see assembly
from one of the generic .c files?

> You could remove that file and so if that's enough.

Okay, good to know that's an option.


--Daniel


-- 
NAME = Daniel Richard G.     _\|/_    Remember, skunks
MAIL = skunk at iSKUNK.ORG     (/o|o\) _- don't smell bad---
MAIL+= skunk at alum.MIT.EDU   < (^),>     it's the people who
WWW  = (not there yet!)      /   \      annoy us that do!