headers
Preston A. Elder | 7 Apr 2002 12:40
Favicon

Re: Gcc 3.0.4 installed system

I'm sure it does ...

But unless I'm missing something here, changing the profile does NOTHING
to change the utilities (read: tar, bzip2, cp, mv, ls, etc) that are
installed WITH the system.

Read my email again carefully.  I manually made my own
'default-1.0-gcc3' profile by changing the packages file to use gcc3
instead of 2.95 and then bootstrapped with it -- and it worked fine
right up until it installed glibc.

Just incase your not a coder.  GLIBC supplies both C and C++ libraries
and symbols for other programs to use.  All C++ symbols are 'mangled',
which is a method the compiler uses to differentiate different functions
with the same name but different types (read up on C++ function
overloading and name mangling).

3.0 changed the mangling scheme used to mangle C++ names from what was
used with 2.x -- which means, quite simply, if you have an application
thats been compiled against libraries built with gcc 2.x, and then you
compile the libraries with 3.x, the application will cease to work,
because it will not be able to find the symbols it needs to run. 
Usually, this will result in a core dump.  This only affects programs
written in C++.

This is exactly what happens with utilities such as tar, which is
written in C++ (which surprised me).  Which is why, your
default-1.0-gcc3 profile will *NOT* enable someone to bootstrap with gcc
3.0, unless you happen to have a stage1 ISO that has statically linked
binaries in it (theoretically, if you have statically linked binaries on
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
Preston A. Elder | 7 Apr 2002 12:49
Favicon

Re: Gcc 3.0.4 installed system

GCC 3.0 is more standards adhering.

GCC 2.95.3 is faster (to compile) because they dont enforce certain
coding standard (eg. ANSI, etc).  There are many things you can get away
with in GCC 2.95 that 3.0 wont let you get away with.

Thats what a lot of the extra compile time is doing in 3.0 -- ensuring
that your adhering to the standards for C/C++ -- which usually saves
your arse at debugging time.

I believe 3.0 also made a bunch of advances in optimization (including
things such as architecture specific optimizations (ala. -march=athlon),
so its working harder to make your code faster.

Finally, GCC 3.0 changed alot of things, such as the C++ ABI -- and now
they have to support both the old and new ABI's (they did this for many
reasons, and apparently, will do it again for 3.1).  Because of this,
any function reference you make, it must figure out what the old and new
version of this function are, so it can look for it in various libraries
it includes -- at link time, the version that it DIDN'T need after all
is thrown away, and it uses the version it did (which is why you can
link against a version of glibc compiled with either gcc 2.95.x or
3.0.x).

At least, this is why I THINK GCC 3.0 is slower at compiling -- as for
runtime speed, there should be little difference, and if GCC did their
job right, binaries compiled with 3.0 should actually be faster.

On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 06:02, Bart Verwilst wrote:
> Howdy
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Thilo Bangert | 7 Apr 2002 12:09
Picon

Re: Can't post attachments to bugzilla


> IMHO, bug reporting should be made as painless as possible to
> encourge participation. Anyways I hope there is an easy solution to
> this problem.

agreed, but
if that is what we want, i believe bugzilla is the wrong choice
- you can't report a bug without an account
- there is no email interface

i am not to familiar with any bug-tracking system, but the 
bugtracking system KDE uses allows this

--

-- 
regards
Thilo
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Geert Bevin | 7 Apr 2002 12:57
Favicon

Re: Gcc 3.0.4 installed system

Bootstrap gives you baselayout, binutils, gcc, glibc and gettext
compiled with gcc3. Everything (including these utilities you talk
about) else is compiled again when you do 'emerge system'. The only
thing I did afterwards is 'ebuild
/var/db/pkg/sys-devel/gcc-2.95.3-r5/gcc-2.95.3-r5.ebuild unmerge' to
ensure that it's not present at all on the system anymore.
The system I have running has no libraries of gcc 2.95.3 installed and
everything is running fine and has been compiled with gcc3. Remember
that is what stage1 -> stage2 -> stage3 really is for.
Sure a stage1 that has been prepared with gcc3 would be cleaner and it's
not that difficult to do. However as long as gcc3 isn't the default
gentoo compiler, I don't see much use for it.

On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 12:40, Preston A. Elder wrote:
> I'm sure it does ...
> 
> But unless I'm missing something here, changing the profile does NOTHING
> to change the utilities (read: tar, bzip2, cp, mv, ls, etc) that are
> installed WITH the system.
> 
> Read my email again carefully.  I manually made my own
> 'default-1.0-gcc3' profile by changing the packages file to use gcc3
> instead of 2.95 and then bootstrapped with it -- and it worked fine
> right up until it installed glibc.
> 
> Just incase your not a coder.  GLIBC supplies both C and C++ libraries
> and symbols for other programs to use.  All C++ symbols are 'mangled',
> which is a method the compiler uses to differentiate different functions
> with the same name but different types (read up on C++ function
> overloading and name mangling).
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Jens Blaesche | 7 Apr 2002 13:05
Picon

Re: Progress of kernel patches like grsecurity ?

Am Son, 2002-04-07 um 12.07 schrieb Kim Nielsen:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I havent heard mutch about the progress of kernel patches (security)
> what kind will Gentoo support and when will they come? 
> 
> As I understand it is impossible to add the patch to the kernel because
> of other patches on upon the kernel .. is this true ?
> 
> /Kim

Take a look at http://sourceforge.net/projects/wolk/

It's works fine under Gentoo.

J.
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Christian Hergl | 7 Apr 2002 14:38
Picon

Re: Gcc 3.0.4 installed system

Hello all, Hello Preston,

just adding my 2 cents. I'm in the process to emerge a system based on 
the gcc 3.0.4 as discussed earlier in this threat.
Having the glibc and gcc3 compiled with the gcc 2.95 of the stage1 iso 
image made me worried after your post.
And indeed, the mini compiler of the iso refused to accept the 
march=athlon flag for the bootstrap.
So, I did the bootstrap with march=i686, and right now am 
re-bootstrapping again with the gcc3.0 and march=athlon, which hopefully 
now compiles a decent optimized gcc and glibc. And should savely give a 
full gcc3 system later.

Could you confirm that the second bootstrap would be a working interim 
solution till a gentoo 1.1 (which, to my suprise seems to be 
downloadable from the gentoo ftp site. Anyone from IRC know what it 
does?) is released?

Greetings,
Christian

Preston A. Elder wrote:
> I'm sure it does ...
> 
> But unless I'm missing something here, changing the profile does NOTHING
> to change the utilities (read: tar, bzip2, cp, mv, ls, etc) that are
> installed WITH the system.
> 
> Read my email again carefully.  I manually made my own
> 'default-1.0-gcc3' profile by changing the packages file to use gcc3
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Erik Grinaker | 7 Apr 2002 14:45

Re: FAQ

On Sat, 2002-04-06 at 09:27, George Shapovalov wrote:

> Please post what questions you think should be included (preferably with 
> answers :)) to this thread. I'll put them in faq.xml and commit it. You can 

(i have ripped out my speaker, so i can't verify this - but it really,
really *should* work :))

you can remove the whole no-beep-on-boot section if you feel it is
better without it

<section>
    <title>
        My speaker beeps like crazy while compiling Mozilla. How do I
        disable console beeps?
    </title>

    <body>
        <p>
            Console beeps can be turned off using setterm, like this ;
        </p>

        <pre># <i>setterm -blength 0</i></pre>

        <p>
            If you would like to turn off the console beeps on boot
            you need to put this command in  
            <path>/etc/conf.d/local.start</path>. However, this only
            disables beeps for the current terminal. To disable
            beeps for other terminals, pipe the command output to the
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Geert Bevin | 7 Apr 2002 14:50
Favicon

Re: Gcc 3.0.4 installed system

The second bootstrap will certainly work, you could also just have done
'emerge gcc' which would first install gcc3 and then start the bootstrap
itself. Saving quite some time normally.

On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 14:38, Christian Hergl wrote:
> Hello all, Hello Preston,
> 
> just adding my 2 cents. I'm in the process to emerge a system based on 
> the gcc 3.0.4 as discussed earlier in this threat.
> Having the glibc and gcc3 compiled with the gcc 2.95 of the stage1 iso 
> image made me worried after your post.
> And indeed, the mini compiler of the iso refused to accept the 
> march=athlon flag for the bootstrap.
> So, I did the bootstrap with march=i686, and right now am 
> re-bootstrapping again with the gcc3.0 and march=athlon, which hopefully 
> now compiles a decent optimized gcc and glibc. And should savely give a 
> full gcc3 system later.
> 
> Could you confirm that the second bootstrap would be a working interim 
> solution till a gentoo 1.1 (which, to my suprise seems to be 
> downloadable from the gentoo ftp site. Anyone from IRC know what it 
> does?) is released?
> 
> Greetings,
> Christian
> 
> Preston A. Elder wrote:
> > I'm sure it does ...
> > 
> > But unless I'm missing something here, changing the profile does NOTHING
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Troy Dack | 7 Apr 2002 16:25

KDE ebuild request for Dan Armak

I'm posting this here because it is not really a bug and doesn't deserve to 
go onto bugs.gentoo.org.

Dan,
        I think you are the absolute genius who put together the KDE3 ebui
lds so quickly, so I'm directing this to you, but if anyone else can help, 
please do.

Is it possible to build an ebuild for KDE3 that checks out this directory 
(http://webcvs.kde.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/kdelibs/kstyles/keramik/?only_with_tag=MAIN) 
and installs that one theme?

Screenshot: http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php?content=1172

If it's far too much effort then that's fine.  Unfortunately I don't have 
the required skills (or time) to attempt this myself.

Thanks again.

Troy

--

-- 
Thus spake the master programmer:
        "Though a program be but three lines long, someday it will have to
        be maintained."
                -- Geoffrey James, "The Tao of Programming"
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
michael | 7 Apr 2002 17:06
Picon

big packages

ill try that when i install from scratch. hopefully late april when 
gcc3.1 is alive and kicking...
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane