[gentoo-user] Re: Can't figure out gcc-4.9 blocker

[Grant Edwards]

On 2016-05-13, Alec Ten Harmsel <alec@××××××××××××××.com> wrote:
> On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 08:25:14PM +0000, Grant Edwards wrote:
>>
>> So, I uninstalled gcc 4.9 and all older versions except 4.6.
>>
>> I then removed 4.6 from the world file (but left it installed).
>>
>> emerge is now happy and willing to upgrade gcc from 4.6 to 4.9 -- but
>> it can't: now the build of 4.9.3 is failing.
>
> What is the error?

I gave up on 4.9.3, and am just trying to rebuild 4.6.4.  It fails
pretty much the same way when trying to build libiberty:

  /usr/include/features.h:328:4: warning: #warning _FORTIFY_SOURCE requires compiling with optimization (-O) [-Wcpp]
  checking for grep that handles long lines and -e... /var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-4.6.4/work/gcc-4.6.4/libiberty/unlink-if-ordinary.c: In function ‘$
  /var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-4.6.4/work/gcc-4.6.4/libiberty/unlink-if-ordinary.c:65:15: error: storage size of ‘st’ isn’t known
  /var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-4.6.4/work/gcc-4.6.4/libiberty/unlink-if-ordinary.c:67:3: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘stat’ [-Wimplicit$
  /var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-4.6.4/work/gcc-4.6.4/libiberty/unlink-if-ordinary.c:68:7: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘S_ISREG’ [-Wimpli$
  /var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-4.6.4/work/gcc-4.6.4/libiberty/unlink-if-ordinary.c:69:5: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘unlink’ [-Wimplic$
  /var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-4.6.4/work/gcc-4.6.4/libiberty/unlink-if-ordinary.c:65:15: warning: unused variable ‘st’ [-Wunused-variable]
  Makefile:1147: recipe for target 'unlink-if-ordinary.o' failed
  make[3]: *** [unlink-if-ordinary.o] Error 1
  make[3]: Leaving directory '/var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-4.6.4/work/build/libiberty'
  Makefile:10456: recipe for target 'all-stage1-libiberty' failed
  make[2]: *** [all-stage1-libiberty] Error 2
  make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....

So, it seems I now don't have a working compiler.

I tried doing a quickpkg of gcc-4.9.3 on one of my other systems
(which is still happy with having 4.9.3 and older versions installed),
but the CPU type didn't match closely enough, and the binaries from
the package had illegal instructions.

-- 
Grant Edwards               grant.b.edwards        Yow! I once decorated my
                                  at               apartment entirely in ten
                              gmail.com            foot salad forks!!