Re: Building SID

I've got the files thanx. They seem broken however....

The following is the first place where it breaks (I noticed that the
build system will not respect neither 'make -S'  nor  'export
MAKEFLAGS="-S" &&  make' - it seems that the recursive build is using
'make -k' no matter what I do).

../../../../src/sid/component/cgen-cpu/sh/sh2.h:16: error:
'sh_common_model' was not declared in this scope
../../../../src/sid/component/cgen-cpu/sh/sh2.h:16: error: wrong
number of template arguments (8, should be 5)
:
:
Which leads to this:

:
:
../../../../src/sid/component/cgen-cpu/sh/sh4-nofpu-defs.h:22: error:
forward declaration of 'class sh4_nofpu::sh4_nofpu_cpu'
../../../../src/sid/component/cgen-cpu/compCGEN.cxx:418: error:
invalid use of undefined type 'class sh4a_nofpu::sh4a_nofpu_cpu'
../../../../src/sid/component/cgen-cpu/sh/sh4a-nofpu-defs.h:22: error:
forward declaration of 'class sh4a_nofpu::sh4a_nofpu_cpu'
../../../../src/sid/component/cgen-cpu/compCGEN.cxx:426: error: cannot
convert 'sh5::sh5_compact_cpu*' to 'sid::component*' in return
../../../../src/sid/component/cgen-cpu/compCGEN.cxx:428: error: cannot
convert 'sh5::sh5_32media_cpu*' to 'sid::component*' in return
../../../../src/sid/component/cgen-cpu/compCGEN.cxx:430: error: cannot
convert 'sh5::sh5_64media_cpu*' to 'sid::component*' in return
make[7]: *** [compCGEN.lo] Error 1
make[6]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
make[5]: *** [all] Error 2

gcc used is the native one for my system which is  i486-linux-gnu
(version 4.0). Note that the standard for forward declarations to
templates has changed (in case you're using an older compiler).

Best
/Michael


On 2/26/07, Dave Brolley <[email protected]> wrote:
> Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
> >
> >> Hers comes the lines where the build breaks:
> >> make[4]: *** No rule to make target `sh64-elf-sid', needed by `all-am'.
> >> The ChangeLog mentions  'sh-elf-sid,sh5-elf-sid,sh64-elf-sid: New
> >> files' so I'm guessing the files were just not committed yet.
> >>
> >
> > That's probably right, it must be an oversight.
> >
> >
> You're right. It was an oversight. Now corrected.
>
> Dave
>
>
>