gcc-4.5 toolchain rebuild
 

Hi,

The gcc-4.5 toolchain rebuild is in [testing]. Here is a summary of the
changes I made:


linux-api-headers-2.6.33.2-1:
update patch level

glibc-2.11.1-3:
patch for gcc-4.5 __i686 define/assembly clash

binutils-2.20.1-2:
rebuild libiberty/libbfd on both platforms
hide symbols in libbfd

gcc-4.5.0-1:
upstream update
add new deps (libmpc, libelf)
enable link time optimization
tidy up configure
add c89 and c99 launcher scripts (POSIX compatibility)


Unlike the last couple of gcc releases, this should be a relatively
minor update in terms of breakages. See
http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.5/changes.html .


As is usual with gcc updates, compiling C++ code with the new toolchain
and running it with the old toolchain may cause some issues (untested)
so be careful.


Signoff both,
Allan

gcc-4.5 toolchain rebuild
 

On 16/04/10 22:32, Allan McRae wrote:

Hi,

The gcc-4.5 toolchain rebuild is in [testing]. Here is a summary of the
changes I made:

linux-api-headers-2.6.33.2-1:
update patch level

glibc-2.11.1-3:
patch for gcc-4.5 __i686 define/assembly clash

binutils-2.20.1-2:
rebuild libiberty/libbfd on both platforms
hide symbols in libbfd

gcc-4.5.0-1:
upstream update
add new deps (libmpc, libelf)
enable link time optimization
tidy up configure
add c89 and c99 launcher scripts (POSIX compatibility)


Unlike the last couple of gcc releases, this should be a relatively
minor update in terms of breakages. See
http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.5/changes.html .

As is usual with gcc updates, compiling C++ code with the new toolchain
and running it with the old toolchain may cause some issues (untested)
so be careful.



Forgot to add, this will move libelf into [core].

Allan

gcc-4.5 toolchain rebuild
 

On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 7:32 AM, Allan McRae <allan@archlinux.org> wrote:
> gcc-4.5.0-1:
> *upstream update
> *add new deps (libmpc, libelf)
> *enable link time optimization
> *tidy up configure
> *add c89 and c99 launcher scripts (POSIX compatibility)

Will we at some point want to add the -lto flag (or whatever it is) to
both CFLAGS and LDFLAGS in our defaults?

-Dan

gcc-4.5 toolchain rebuild
 

On 16/04/10 23:21, Dan McGee wrote:

On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 7:32 AM, Allan McRae<allan@archlinux.org> wrote:

gcc-4.5.0-1:
upstream update
add new deps (libmpc, libelf)
enable link time optimization
tidy up configure
add c89 and c99 launcher scripts (POSIX compatibility)


Will we at some point want to add the -lto flag (or whatever it is) to
both CFLAGS and LDFLAGS in our defaults?


It is -flto (and if you are really keen, add -fwhopr with
-fwhole-program - experimental).


I would not advocate adding it by default. Linking is a lot slower
(obviously) and it seems to use more memory... sometimes a lot more.
I'd let the ricers play with this flag for a while before considering it
as the default.


Allan

gcc-4.5 toolchain rebuild
 

On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 8:38 AM, Allan McRae <allan@archlinux.org> wrote:
> On 16/04/10 23:21, Dan McGee wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 7:32 AM, Allan McRae<allan@archlinux.org> *wrote:
>>>
>>> gcc-4.5.0-1:
>>> *upstream update
>>> *add new deps (libmpc, libelf)
>>> *enable link time optimization
>>> *tidy up configure
>>> *add c89 and c99 launcher scripts (POSIX compatibility)
>>
>> Will we at some point want to add the -lto flag (or whatever it is) to
>> both CFLAGS and LDFLAGS in our defaults?
>
> It is -flto *(and if you are really keen, add -fwhopr *with -fwhole-program
> - experimental).
>
> I would not advocate adding it by default. *Linking is a lot slower
> (obviously) and it seems to use more memory... *sometimes a lot more.
OK sounds good.

> I'd
> let the ricers play with this flag for a while before considering it as the
> default.
But they get to have all the fun! :P
http://www.pbase.com/ha3349/image/76708585

-Dan

gcc-4.5 toolchain rebuild
 

On 17/04/10 00:03, Emmanuel Benisty wrote:

Just out of curiosity, what is the plan regarding this issue (quoted
from the gcc changelog):

On x86 targets, code containing floating-point calculations may run
significantly slower when compiled with GCC 4.5 in strict C99
conformance mode than they did with earlier GCC versions. This is due
to stricter standard conformance of the compiler and can be avoided by
using the option -fexcess-precision=fast;



From what I understand, this requires passing -std=c99 (or equivalent)
to the compiler for it to use strict C99 mode. So most software will
not be affected. Of course, the maintainer of any software the does set
C99 mode should consider this.


Allan

gcc-4.5 toolchain rebuild
 

On 17/04/10 00:03, Emmanuel Benisty wrote:

Just out of curiosity, what is the plan regarding this issue (quoted
from the gcc changelog):

On x86 targets, code containing floating-point calculations may run
significantly slower when compiled with GCC 4.5 in strict C99
conformance mode than they did with earlier GCC versions. This is due
to stricter standard conformance of the compiler and can be avoided by
using the option -fexcess-precision=fast;



From what I understand, this requires passing -std=c99 (or equivalent)
to the compiler for it to use strict C99 mode. So most software will
not be affected. Of course, the maintainer of any software the does set
C99 mode should consider this.


Allan

gcc-4.5 toolchain rebuild
 

On 04/16/2010 03:32 PM, Allan McRae wrote:

Hi,

The gcc-4.5 toolchain rebuild is in [testing]. Here is a summary of the
changes I made:


signoff i686. virtualbox is compiling fine.

--
Ionut

gcc-4.5 toolchain rebuild
 

Am Fri, 16 Apr 2010 22:32:05 +1000
schrieb Allan McRae <allan@archlinux.org>:

> Hi,
>
> The gcc-4.5 toolchain rebuild is in [testing]. Here is a summary of
> the changes I made:
>
> linux-api-headers-2.6.33.2-1:
> update patch level
>
> glibc-2.11.1-3:
> patch for gcc-4.5 __i686 define/assembly clash
>
> binutils-2.20.1-2:
> rebuild libiberty/libbfd on both platforms
> hide symbols in libbfd
>
> gcc-4.5.0-1:
> upstream update
> add new deps (libmpc, libelf)
> enable link time optimization
> tidy up configure
> add c89 and c99 launcher scripts (POSIX compatibility)
>
>
> Unlike the last couple of gcc releases, this should be a relatively
> minor update in terms of breakages. See
> http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.5/changes.html .
>
> As is usual with gcc updates, compiling C++ code with the new
> toolchain and running it with the old toolchain may cause some issues
> (untested) so be careful.
>
> Signoff both,
> Allan
>

signoff x86_64 + i686. could build unixodbc+qt well. I'll blame you if
OOo fails(A... broke it).

-Andy

gcc-4.5 toolchain rebuild
 

signing off both.
--
Pierre Schmitz, https://users.archlinux.de/~pierre