Libatomic and libgnat from gcc-4.8.5-4 appear not to be built on aarch64. How to file bug? See below from spec:
Summary: Various compilers (C, C++, Objective-C, Java, ...) Name: gcc %if 0%{?rhel} == 7 %global gcc_version 4.8.2 %else %global gcc_version 4.8.5 %endif Version: 4.8.5 Release: %{gcc_release}%{?dist} ... ( Missing aarch64 ) v %ifarch %{ix86} x86_64 ppc ppc64 ppc64le ppc64p7 s390 s390x aarch64 %{arm} %global build_libatomic 1
I did a smoke test and was able to bootstrap both using f21 aarch64. Have the rpms if needed.
On 07/28/2016 04:17 PM, Ed Brand wrote:
Libatomic and libgnat from gcc-4.8.5-4 appear not to be built on aarch64. How to file bug? See below from spec:
Bugs can be filed at bugs.centos.org
Summary: Various compilers (C, C++, Objective-C, Java, ...) Name: gcc %if 0%{?rhel} == 7 %global gcc_version 4.8.2 %else %global gcc_version 4.8.5 %endif Version: 4.8.5 Release: %{gcc_release}%{?dist} ... ( Missing aarch64 ) v %ifarch %{ix86} x86_64 ppc ppc64 ppc64le ppc64p7 s390 s390x aarch64 %{arm} %global build_libatomic 1
I did a smoke test and was able to bootstrap both using f21 aarch64. Have the rpms if needed.
Some of the gcc bits I had patched out of the initial gcc build, because of the lack of early support and/or bootstrap pain (primarily ada and related bits).
Unfortunately building against f21 can potentially cause issues with gcc/glibc artifacts because of the newer glibc/gcc included in fedora.
When we did the initial port/build for this, we had to start from f19 aarch64 builds and work up from there because of this. If you can (re)build against the el7 aarch64 build, that will give you a better result. I'll poke it tomorrow.
I completely understand the ada bootstrap issues. Thats why i went up instead of down. Ill do some tests rebuild under el7. Would be nice to get the ada bootstrap issues worked out
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 28, 2016, at 8:38 PM, Jim Perrin jperrin@centos.org wrote:
On 07/28/2016 04:17 PM, Ed Brand wrote: Libatomic and libgnat from gcc-4.8.5-4 appear not to be built on aarch64. How to file bug? See below from spec:
Bugs can be filed at bugs.centos.org
Summary: Various compilers (C, C++, Objective-C, Java, ...) Name: gcc %if 0%{?rhel} == 7 %global gcc_version 4.8.2 %else %global gcc_version 4.8.5 %endif Version: 4.8.5 Release: %{gcc_release}%{?dist} ... ( Missing aarch64 ) v %ifarch %{ix86} x86_64 ppc ppc64 ppc64le ppc64p7 s390 s390x aarch64 %{arm} %global build_libatomic 1
I did a smoke test and was able to bootstrap both using f21 aarch64. Have the rpms if needed.
Some of the gcc bits I had patched out of the initial gcc build, because of the lack of early support and/or bootstrap pain (primarily ada and related bits).
Unfortunately building against f21 can potentially cause issues with gcc/glibc artifacts because of the newer glibc/gcc included in fedora.
When we did the initial port/build for this, we had to start from f19 aarch64 builds and work up from there because of this. If you can (re)build against the el7 aarch64 build, that will give you a better result. I'll poke it tomorrow.
-- Jim Perrin The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77 _______________________________________________ Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev
SUCCESS!!!
What a PITA. I did hit the glibc artifact issue, ended up building a complete cross-compiled gcc-4.9 toolchain for Centos7 x86_64. gcc-4.8 is just not happy being cross-compiled.
I did a write up and uploaded everything to the below link if you want to give it a go, or repeat for arm32 port. Basically followed the f21 stage 1 port docs to get it bootstrapped. I would like to see this in the main distro. Do you need a bug filed?
http://arm.brandint.com/centos7/aarch64/bootstrap/Centos7-AARCH64-CrossCompi...
Cheers
-Ed
On 07/28/2016 08:38 PM, Jim Perrin wrote:
On 07/28/2016 04:17 PM, Ed Brand wrote:
Libatomic and libgnat from gcc-4.8.5-4 appear not to be built on aarch64. How to file bug? See below from spec:
Bugs can be filed at bugs.centos.org
Summary: Various compilers (C, C++, Objective-C, Java, ...) Name: gcc %if 0%{?rhel} == 7 %global gcc_version 4.8.2 %else %global gcc_version 4.8.5 %endif Version: 4.8.5 Release: %{gcc_release}%{?dist} ... ( Missing aarch64 ) v %ifarch %{ix86} x86_64 ppc ppc64 ppc64le ppc64p7 s390 s390x aarch64 %{arm} %global build_libatomic 1
I did a smoke test and was able to bootstrap both using f21 aarch64. Have the rpms if needed.
Some of the gcc bits I had patched out of the initial gcc build, because of the lack of early support and/or bootstrap pain (primarily ada and related bits).
Unfortunately building against f21 can potentially cause issues with gcc/glibc artifacts because of the newer glibc/gcc included in fedora.
When we did the initial port/build for this, we had to start from f19 aarch64 builds and work up from there because of this. If you can (re)build against the el7 aarch64 build, that will give you a better result. I'll poke it tomorrow.
Please. Ordinarily I'd say no, but I'm traveling for meetings this week and don't want to lose it. I'd ask that you submit the bug or ping me Monday about it and I'll get to work.
On Aug 1, 2016 00:16, "Ed Brand" ebrand0007@gmail.com wrote:
SUCCESS!!!
What a PITA. I did hit the glibc artifact issue, ended up building a complete cross-compiled gcc-4.9 toolchain for Centos7 x86_64. gcc-4.8 is just not happy being cross-compiled.
I did a write up and uploaded everything to the below link if you want to give it a go, or repeat for arm32 port. Basically followed the f21 stage 1 port docs to get it bootstrapped. I would like to see this in the main distro. Do you need a bug filed?
http://arm.brandint.com/centos7/aarch64/bootstrap/Centos7-AARCH64-CrossCompi...
Cheers
-Ed
On 07/28/2016 08:38 PM, Jim Perrin wrote:
On 07/28/2016 04:17 PM, Ed Brand wrote:
Libatomic and libgnat from gcc-4.8.5-4 appear not to be built on aarch64. How to file bug? See below from spec:
Bugs can be filed at bugs.centos.org
Summary: Various compilers (C, C++, Objective-C, Java, ...)
Name: gcc %if 0%{?rhel} == 7 %global gcc_version 4.8.2 %else %global gcc_version 4.8.5 %endif Version: 4.8.5 Release: %{gcc_release}%{?dist} ... ( Missing aarch64 ) v %ifarch %{ix86} x86_64 ppc ppc64 ppc64le ppc64p7 s390 s390x aarch64 %{arm} %global build_libatomic 1
I did a smoke test and was able to bootstrap both using f21 aarch64. Have the rpms if needed.
Some of the gcc bits I had patched out of the initial gcc build, because of the lack of early support and/or bootstrap pain (primarily ada and related bits).
Unfortunately building against f21 can potentially cause issues with gcc/glibc artifacts because of the newer glibc/gcc included in fedora.
When we did the initial port/build for this, we had to start from f19 aarch64 builds and work up from there because of this. If you can (re)build against the el7 aarch64 build, that will give you a better result. I'll poke it tomorrow.
Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev
Just as a follow-up on this, I'm cycling through the build for it now and you should see this pushed as an update in the next day or so.
On 07/31/2016 06:16 PM, Ed Brand wrote:
SUCCESS!!!
What a PITA. I did hit the glibc artifact issue, ended up building a complete cross-compiled gcc-4.9 toolchain for Centos7 x86_64. gcc-4.8 is just not happy being cross-compiled.
I did a write up and uploaded everything to the below link if you want to give it a go, or repeat for arm32 port. Basically followed the f21 stage 1 port docs to get it bootstrapped. I would like to see this in the main distro. Do you need a bug filed?
http://arm.brandint.com/centos7/aarch64/bootstrap/Centos7-AARCH64-CrossCompi...
Cheers
-Ed
On 07/28/2016 08:38 PM, Jim Perrin wrote:
On 07/28/2016 04:17 PM, Ed Brand wrote:
Libatomic and libgnat from gcc-4.8.5-4 appear not to be built on aarch64. How to file bug? See below from spec:
Bugs can be filed at bugs.centos.org
Summary: Various compilers (C, C++, Objective-C, Java, ...) Name: gcc %if 0%{?rhel} == 7 %global gcc_version 4.8.2 %else %global gcc_version 4.8.5 %endif Version: 4.8.5 Release: %{gcc_release}%{?dist} ... ( Missing aarch64 ) v %ifarch %{ix86} x86_64 ppc ppc64 ppc64le ppc64p7 s390 s390x aarch64 %{arm} %global build_libatomic 1
I did a smoke test and was able to bootstrap both using f21 aarch64. Have the rpms if needed.
Some of the gcc bits I had patched out of the initial gcc build, because of the lack of early support and/or bootstrap pain (primarily ada and related bits).
Unfortunately building against f21 can potentially cause issues with gcc/glibc artifacts because of the newer glibc/gcc included in fedora.
When we did the initial port/build for this, we had to start from f19 aarch64 builds and work up from there because of this. If you can (re)build against the el7 aarch64 build, that will give you a better result. I'll poke it tomorrow.
Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev
Thank u
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 9, 2016, at 11:15 AM, Jim Perrin jperrin@centos.org wrote:
Just as a follow-up on this, I'm cycling through the build for it now and you should see this pushed as an update in the next day or so.
On 07/31/2016 06:16 PM, Ed Brand wrote: SUCCESS!!!
What a PITA. I did hit the glibc artifact issue, ended up building a complete cross-compiled gcc-4.9 toolchain for Centos7 x86_64. gcc-4.8 is just not happy being cross-compiled.
I did a write up and uploaded everything to the below link if you want to give it a go, or repeat for arm32 port. Basically followed the f21 stage 1 port docs to get it bootstrapped. I would like to see this in the main distro. Do you need a bug filed?
http://arm.brandint.com/centos7/aarch64/bootstrap/Centos7-AARCH64-CrossCompi...
Cheers
-Ed
On 07/28/2016 08:38 PM, Jim Perrin wrote:
On 07/28/2016 04:17 PM, Ed Brand wrote: Libatomic and libgnat from gcc-4.8.5-4 appear not to be built on aarch64. How to file bug? See below from spec:
Bugs can be filed at bugs.centos.org
Summary: Various compilers (C, C++, Objective-C, Java, ...) Name: gcc %if 0%{?rhel} == 7 %global gcc_version 4.8.2 %else %global gcc_version 4.8.5 %endif Version: 4.8.5 Release: %{gcc_release}%{?dist} ... ( Missing aarch64 ) v %ifarch %{ix86} x86_64 ppc ppc64 ppc64le ppc64p7 s390 s390x aarch64 %{arm} %global build_libatomic 1
I did a smoke test and was able to bootstrap both using f21 aarch64. Have the rpms if needed.
Some of the gcc bits I had patched out of the initial gcc build, because of the lack of early support and/or bootstrap pain (primarily ada and related bits).
Unfortunately building against f21 can potentially cause issues with gcc/glibc artifacts because of the newer glibc/gcc included in fedora.
When we did the initial port/build for this, we had to start from f19 aarch64 builds and work up from there because of this. If you can (re)build against the el7 aarch64 build, that will give you a better result. I'll poke it tomorrow.
Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev
-- Jim Perrin The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77 _______________________________________________ Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev
Awesome, i just updated to it. Many thanks.
Any one looking at the armhfp branch for consistency? If you need help I can do the same for it. Let me know, don't want to duplicate any efforts..all i ask is some kudos in the changelog ;)
On 08/09/2016 11:15 AM, Jim Perrin wrote:
Just as a follow-up on this, I'm cycling through the build for it now and you should see this pushed as an update in the next day or so.
On 07/31/2016 06:16 PM, Ed Brand wrote:
SUCCESS!!!
What a PITA. I did hit the glibc artifact issue, ended up building a complete cross-compiled gcc-4.9 toolchain for Centos7 x86_64. gcc-4.8 is just not happy being cross-compiled.
I did a write up and uploaded everything to the below link if you want to give it a go, or repeat for arm32 port. Basically followed the f21 stage 1 port docs to get it bootstrapped. I would like to see this in the main distro. Do you need a bug filed?
http://arm.brandint.com/centos7/aarch64/bootstrap/Centos7-AARCH64-CrossCompi...
Cheers
-Ed
On 07/28/2016 08:38 PM, Jim Perrin wrote:
On 07/28/2016 04:17 PM, Ed Brand wrote:
Libatomic and libgnat from gcc-4.8.5-4 appear not to be built on aarch64. How to file bug? See below from spec:
Bugs can be filed at bugs.centos.org
Summary: Various compilers (C, C++, Objective-C, Java, ...) Name: gcc %if 0%{?rhel} == 7 %global gcc_version 4.8.2 %else %global gcc_version 4.8.5 %endif Version: 4.8.5 Release: %{gcc_release}%{?dist} ... ( Missing aarch64 ) v %ifarch %{ix86} x86_64 ppc ppc64 ppc64le ppc64p7 s390 s390x aarch64 %{arm} %global build_libatomic 1
I did a smoke test and was able to bootstrap both using f21 aarch64. Have the rpms if needed.
Some of the gcc bits I had patched out of the initial gcc build, because of the lack of early support and/or bootstrap pain (primarily ada and related bits).
Unfortunately building against f21 can potentially cause issues with gcc/glibc artifacts because of the newer glibc/gcc included in fedora.
When we did the initial port/build for this, we had to start from f19 aarch64 builds and work up from there because of this. If you can (re)build against the el7 aarch64 build, that will give you a better result. I'll poke it tomorrow.
Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev
I haven't looked at the armhfp bits, no. We'll likely try to make a bigger push for this sort of thing around the 7.3 timeframe to line it all up. We'll see how that works.
On 08/20/2016 08:08 AM, Ed Brand wrote:
Awesome, i just updated to it. Many thanks.
Any one looking at the armhfp branch for consistency? If you need help I can do the same for it. Let me know, don't want to duplicate any efforts..all i ask is some kudos in the changelog ;)
On 08/09/2016 11:15 AM, Jim Perrin wrote:
Just as a follow-up on this, I'm cycling through the build for it now and you should see this pushed as an update in the next day or so.
On 07/31/2016 06:16 PM, Ed Brand wrote:
SUCCESS!!!
What a PITA. I did hit the glibc artifact issue, ended up building a complete cross-compiled gcc-4.9 toolchain for Centos7 x86_64. gcc-4.8 is just not happy being cross-compiled.
I did a write up and uploaded everything to the below link if you want to give it a go, or repeat for arm32 port. Basically followed the f21 stage 1 port docs to get it bootstrapped. I would like to see this in the main distro. Do you need a bug filed?
http://arm.brandint.com/centos7/aarch64/bootstrap/Centos7-AARCH64-CrossCompi...
Cheers
-Ed
On 07/28/2016 08:38 PM, Jim Perrin wrote:
On 07/28/2016 04:17 PM, Ed Brand wrote:
Libatomic and libgnat from gcc-4.8.5-4 appear not to be built on aarch64. How to file bug? See below from spec:
Bugs can be filed at bugs.centos.org
Summary: Various compilers (C, C++, Objective-C, Java, ...) Name: gcc %if 0%{?rhel} == 7 %global gcc_version 4.8.2 %else %global gcc_version 4.8.5 %endif Version: 4.8.5 Release: %{gcc_release}%{?dist} ... ( Missing aarch64 ) v %ifarch %{ix86} x86_64 ppc ppc64 ppc64le ppc64p7 s390 s390x aarch64 %{arm} %global build_libatomic 1
I did a smoke test and was able to bootstrap both using f21 aarch64. Have the rpms if needed.
Some of the gcc bits I had patched out of the initial gcc build, because of the lack of early support and/or bootstrap pain (primarily ada and related bits).
Unfortunately building against f21 can potentially cause issues with gcc/glibc artifacts because of the newer glibc/gcc included in fedora.
When we did the initial port/build for this, we had to start from f19 aarch64 builds and work up from there because of this. If you can (re)build against the el7 aarch64 build, that will give you a better result. I'll poke it tomorrow.
Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev
Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev
-
Ed Brand -
Jim Perrin