From owner-freebsd-ppc@freebsd.org Sat Apr 25 22:26:47 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ppc@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60F482C2CC0 for ; Sat, 25 Apr 2020 22:26:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:6074::16:84]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "freefall.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 498lyH1xZrz4f8q for ; Sat, 25 Apr 2020 22:26:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by freefall.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 22F6320C4; Sat, 25 Apr 2020 22:26:47 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: powerpc@localmail.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (Client CN "mx1.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by freefall.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1EF74219F for ; Sat, 25 Apr 2020 22:26:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 498lyG6JNdz4f8n for ; Sat, 25 Apr 2020 22:26:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:1d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF7ADED3A for ; Sat, 25 Apr 2020 22:26:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.5]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 03PMQken051180 for ; Sat, 25 Apr 2020 22:26:46 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 03PMQkDd051179 for powerpc@FreeBSD.org; Sat, 25 Apr 2020 22:26:46 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: powerpc@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 245511] lang/gcc9: build with base GCC on powerpc64 elfv1 Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2020 22:26:46 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Ports & Packages X-Bugzilla-Component: Individual Port(s) X-Bugzilla-Version: Latest X-Bugzilla-Keywords: buildisok X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: pkubaj@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: Open X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: gerald@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: maintainer-feedback- X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ppc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the PowerPC List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2020 22:26:47 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D245511 --- Comment #5 from Piotr Kubaj --- (In reply to Gerald Pfeifer from comment #4) Thanks, it indeed works. I thought I tested that approach already, but I clearly didn't. Please, don't disable gcc9-devel for powerpc*. Even if there are no users of those on powerpc*, gcc*-devel serve as great testing bed to check that the = next release will build just fine (especially because you don't do tests on powerpc*). This is why I think that gcc10-devel should build as well, even though no port depends on it (regarding to my earlier PR about gcc10-devel = on powerpc64 elfv2). Why are those changes crippling GCC? I understand that it will run slower, = but so is the case already for GCC 7 and 8. I think it's still better from rela= ying on bootstrap compiler. It will also make it easier for you to remove GCC 8 ports in the future. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.=