gcc 9 and 10

@Raziel

Thanks for testing. Indeed, -fanalyze is hungry, not something for every write, compile and test iteration.

@sTix

At least we have it and it's working, so good for future bug hunting sessions.

i also just found my old bug report on "that other switch that wasn't working", maybe you remember?

It was the profiler (-pg) that is crashing.
See here:
https://github.com/sba1/adtools/issues/72

Though i don't know if it is a problem of gcc or one of the many adtools.

I'll drop it here so it gets some update...

GCC cross compiler.

Checking in on best approach to getting a cross compiler up that supports std:max_align_t. Does sba or sodero for k currently support and do I need to build a more up to date cLib as I know newlib does not support this.

Any help pointing me at pieces would be appreciated.

Regards
Doug

@DStastny
Quote:

The answer is yes and yes.

If you follow the adtools guide and checkout and build gcc 11.1.0 it should work. It will also build my clib2 fork which is needed for c++11/17/2a.

@sTix

Thanks I will clone from your repo.

Doug

@DStastny
Quote:

It's better if you use the main repo, sba1/adtools, instead of my fork. The main adtools repo is using my clib2 fork. It's a bit confusing, bit it's the least bad we could do since PR:s for the main clib2 repo take to long.

@sTix

Thank you sir! I cloned the main repo. Built and moving forward. Prior to this was pointless to try to port the codebase I am attempting. Moving further along. Now to replace the platform code and create Amiga specific implementations.

Really appreciate work on clib2.

Regards
Doug

@sTix



I ran into this issue it appears the cross compiler is generating version dwarf 5 but ld .... Not sure if this is config during build. For now easy work around set the build flags -gdwarf-4.

Lots of symbols for me to resolve

Regards
Doug

@DStastny

That's strange. I get nothing like that when building. That llvm thing is especially strange. What host OS are you using?

@sTix

I built cross under Ubuntu 20.10 with gcc version 10.3.0 (Ubuntu 10.3.0-1ubuntu1~20.10).


According to this:https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-11/changes.html

Dwarf5 is the default for gcc-11. But doubt binutils for amiga is even close to current. So this would explain it.


As for LLVM, been trying to get this built for while but too many issues with std:: namespace.

But for first time I got it to point of linking the first parts and missing symbols are intentional as I need to provide Amiga specific implementations.

Regard and thanks again for efforts.

Doug

@DStastny

Aha, then I understand. I thought that message came up when building adtools, hence my confusion. Indeed, our binutils is very old so unfortunately it's necessary to use -gdwarf-version when building with gcc 11 if one wants to use gdb.

I hope you succeed with LLVM, it would be very nice to have.

@sTix

Do inderstand that right...if i want to use (the new and updated) gdb with a project, i need to compile that project with -gdwarf-version?

Any more options needed for that?
e.g. -gdwarf-version 4 (to explicitely use the version)?

@Raziel

Yes. I haven't tried it myself yet (since gdb didn't work at all on X5000 when I looked at it last time, but someone fixed something since then if I remember correctly?), but '-gdwarf-4' should work.

@sTix

Thank you.
Will try that out once I'm back home

@Raziel

Forgot; was the fix (that I believe someone did) in gdb itself, or in the kernel? In other words, is it available for mere mortals?

@sTix

Not sure and I'm the wrong one to ask

But iirc (and take that with a big pile of salt) it was a combination of both.
First a fixed kernel was released (I think upd2) and upon that gdb development got back a little momentum.

@Raziel

Thanks! I think I was wrong above, isn't our gdb stuck at dwarf-2?

@sTix


I have not the slightest idea...I don't even know what dwarf is or does

@Raziel

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DWARF

@sTix
Can you a bit clear up how things going on with gcc on our side ?:) i see on your github page that 10.3.0_build_2 was the latest one but on sba1's page i can see there were gcc 11.1 support added by you as well.

What one is better to grab: from your page which is 10.3.0_buld2 or from SBA1's page? i mean gcc11 is not too beta ?:)

i also found that on your and sba1's pages we have "Failed to load latest commit information." which probably harmless but still.