[BuildTools] More tales of GCC 64-bit and Solaris

Andreas Waechter andreasw at watson.ibm.com
Fri Nov 16 19:01:52 EST 2007


Hi Lou,

Maybe some of those issues have been fixed in the newer versions of 
autoconf, automake, and particularly libtool...

I will be short of time for a while, but do you think we should pursue the 
switch?

Thanks

Andreas

On Fri, 16 Nov 2007, Lou Hafer wrote:

> Stefan, Andreas,
>
> 	As I keep poking at this, it just gets curiouser and curiouser. Thought
> I would post these comments so they are archived.
>
> 	I finally put the finishing touches on some scripts that allow me to
> easily switch build environments (Studio / GCC, 32- / 64-bit, GCC version) on
> both SPARC and x86 hardware, and can now do some comparisons between GCC
> versions.
>
> 	I managed to get GCC 64-bit builds working on SPARC hardware with GCC
> 4.1.1; this required a patch to BuildTools because GCC 4.1.1 returned 32-bit
> library directories for `gcc -m64 -print-search-dirs'.  While I was at INFORMS,
> our systems staff installed GCC 4.2.1.  It *does* report the correct library
> directories, returning 32-bit directories for `gcc -print-search-dirs', and
> 64-bit directories for `gcc -m64 -print-search-dirs'.
>
> 	Stefan, this might go a little ways toward explaining your observation
> that setting CC to `gcc -m64' seemed to work, but you had trouble with CC=gcc
> and ADD_CFLAGS=-m64. In fact, we might want to recommend that the 32- / 64-bit
> flag be incorporated into CC / CXX / F77 just to make sure all of autotools see
> it.
>
> 	This also means I need a more robust algorithm for patching the libtool
> sys_lib_search_path_spec definition, one that will get it right if the spec is
> already correct.
>
> 	An analogous patch, using amd64 instead of sparcv9, is required for
> Solaris / x86.  My guess is that if the underlying hardware is actually Intel,
> yet another hardware designation will be required. Fortunately, I think I can
> just ask Solaris for the correct string (first value returned by `isainfo').
>
> 	More and more, I appreciate the systems knowledge already incorporated
> in autotools.
>
> 							Lou
>
> _______________________________________________
> BuildTools mailing list
> BuildTools at list.coin-or.org
> http://list.coin-or.org/mailman/listinfo/buildtools
>


More information about the BuildTools mailing list