Re: avr-gcc still broken because of new device specific specs and libs

Denis Chertykov <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.hardware.avr.gcc
Message-ID <CADOs=zZkGhffhcMG0EPnWFyLxWPWrJggg=A-_Pm2d-sntgmp5A@mail.gmail.com>
2015-02-20 14:56 GMT+03:00 Georg-Johann Lay <[email protected]>:
> avr-gcc is still broken and fails to compile trivial programs:
>
>
> $ avr-gcc-5.0 -mmcu=atmega8 main.c
> /local/gnu/install/gcc-5.0/lib/gcc/avr/5.0.0/../../../../avr/bin/ld: cannot
> find dev/atmega8/crt1.o: No such file or directory
> /local/gnu/install/gcc-5.0/lib/gcc/avr/5.0.0/../../../../avr/bin/ld: cannot
> find dev/atmega8/libdev.a: No such file or directory
> collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
>
> Target: avr
> Configured with: ../../gcc.gnu.org/trunk/configure --target=avr
> --prefix=/local/gnu/install/gcc-5.0 --disable-shared --disable-nls
> --with-dwarf2 --enable-target-optspace=yes --with-gnu-as --with-gnu-ld
> target_alias=avr --enable-languages=c,c++
>
> gcc version 5.0.0 20150216 (experimental) (GCC)
>
>
> I just updated my sources and built / installed
>
> - GCC configured for avr (trunk)
> - Binutils configured for avr (master)
> - AVR-Libc (trunk)
>
>
> This situation persists for several months now, since around october '14 or
> so.
>
>
> When will this be fixed?
>
> Or am I missing something fundamentally like new configure options?
>
> More specifically:
>
> 1) Where is the (internal) documentation of all of this?
>
> 2) What must I do to get a working toolchain?
>
> 3) What must I do to get a working build directory, e.g. for running
> testsuite against a freshly built and not yet installed compiler?
>
> 4) If this stuff is not (completely) hosted in GCC repo, what has been done
> (e.g. GCC configury) so that older GCC versions factor out the presumably
> now incompatible dependencies?  In particular:  How is ensured that avr-gcc
> 4.9, 4.8 etc. will still build and work as expected with such external
> dependencies?
>
> 5) Are these extensions hosted in a different place? I.e. is avr backend no
> more supported by the FSF or forked and FSF code base messed up by
> half-baked changes?  Or is hardware vendor simply half-hearted about state
> of avr-gcc?

Generally, I think that here (on AVR land) FSF is me.
(or no FSF at all because I'm not FSF employee. I'm just a contributor
and maintainer)

I do not know anything about the hardware vendor.
I never had any relationship with the ATMEL.

Probably I have approved wrong or incomplete patch. (If it's not a GCC
core patch)
It seems that problem is in generation of `t-multilib' by `genmultilib.awk '.

>
>
> The current situation is that it's almost impossible to contribute to
> avr-gcc because it's impossible to run tests against patches.

Why ?

>
> Applying additional patches or hacks to get it linking is actually no
> solution because that will invalidate test results as tests won't run
> against the intended patch but against a completely different delta.
>

If you can provide a patch to fix the bug then please do it.


> If nobody is inclined to complete the device-specs / device-libc then I will
> propose to revert these changes in order to get a working avr-gcc 5.0.

Which changes ?

If you have a solution then please provide it.
If not then I will investigate the problem but it takes a time.

Denis.

PS: I'm slow because a bit demotivated for these 17 years. It's not a
big structure. It's you, me, Joern and a few other people. No FSF, no
ATMEL, no GCC core people.
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.