Re: preparing for GCC 4.9

Hello and apologies for the cross-post,
I've built GCC 4.9 on my PowerMac G5 (ppc64) running Debian 7.3.  I'd like 
to support the port of Debian to this platform using GCC 4.9 and would 
appreciate a pointer on where to begin if possible.
Additionally, I could provide a SSH login to the machine.
Thanks,
Dave


-----Original Message----- 
From: Matthias Klose
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2014 7:00 AM
To: David Gosselin ; Patrick Baggett
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: preparing for GCC 4.9

sorry, can't help with this. setting up a pbuilder or sbuild, and start 
building
packages from the base system?

  Matthias

Am 13.05.2014 03:26, schrieb David Gosselin:
> I'm in the same boat as Patrick, except with a PowerMac G5. Please let us 
> know how to begin.
> Thanks,
> Dave
>
>> On May 12, 2014, at 16:02, Patrick Baggett <[email protected]> 
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Matthias et al,
>>
>> I'd like to try to do some of this using my sparc box and see how far I 
>> get. Is there a link that explains how to set up these steps? Others seem 
>> to "just know" what to do, but I haven't the slightest idea of where to 
>> begin. I have a box with gcc-4.9, plenty of disk space, and electricity 
>> to burn. Where do I start?
>>
>> Patrick
>>
>>
>>> On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 10:25 AM, Matthias Klose <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> With gcc-4.9 now available in testing, it is time to prepare for the 
>>> change of
>>> the default to 4.9, for a subset of architectures or for all (release)
>>> architectures.  The defaults for the gdc, gccgo, gcj and gnat frontends 
>>> already
>>> point to 4.9 and are used on all architectures.  Issue #746805 tracks 
>>> the
>>> gfortran default change, including the change of the Fortran 90 module 
>>> version
>>> change.
>>>
>>> The Debian archive was rebuilt twice on amd64, once in February, 
>>> resulting in
>>> bug submissions for GCC and feedback for the porting guide [1], a second 
>>> time in
>>> March to file issues for packages failing to build with GCC 4.9 [2]. 
>>> Another
>>> test rebuild for Ubuntu on amd64, i386, armhf, ppc64el didn't show any 
>>> other
>>> compiler regressions on these architectures.
>>>
>>> I would like to see some partial test rebuilds (like buildd or minimal 
>>> chroot
>>> packages) for other architectures. Any possibility to setup such a test 
>>> rebuild
>>> for some architectures by the porters? Afaics the results for the GCC 
>>> testsuite
>>> look okish for every architecture.
>>>
>>> I'll work on fixing the build failures in [2], help is of course 
>>> appreciated.
>>> Almost all build failures are analyzed and should be easy to fix 
>>> (exceptions
>>> e.g. #746883).  Patches for the ones not caused by the Debian packaging 
>>> may be
>>> found in distributions already using GCC 4.9 as the default compiler 
>>> (e.g.
>>> Fedora 21).
>>>
>>> If anything goes well, and a large amount of build failures are fixed, I 
>>> plan to
>>> make GCC 4.9 the default for the C/C++/ObjC/Obj-C++ frontends at the end 
>>> of May,
>>> beginning of June.
>>>
>>> Bugs reports for packages building with a legacy version of GCC (4.6, 
>>> 4.7, 4.8)
>>> will be filed.
>>>
>>>   Matthias
>>>
>>> [1] http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.9/porting_to.html
>>> [2]
>>> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=ftbfs-gcc-4.9;[email protected]
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
>>> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact 
>>> [email protected]
>>> Archive: https://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
>>
>


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact 
[email protected]
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/[email protected]