On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 08:03:42 +0100, Dave wrote:

> AGT wrote:
>
>> Eventually it did so that worked.
>> I just built mplayer from a source snapshot in 32 bit.
>> 64 Im not so sure yet
>
> What options did you use? Can you post the top of config.log, which I
> think has them.

Due to my usage of 'env' I dont think they'll all show up
And I built on SPARC but I'd like to believe that doesnt matter.
HA! The options were entirely generic

configure --prefix=/opt/gcc --enable-multilib --enable-languages and two
options for the gmp and other prerequitiste lib as suggested by configure

env included LD_RUN_PATH=/usr/lib:/opt/gcc/lib:/opt/gcc/lib/sparcv9
LDFLAGS="-L -R -L -R" (where the gmp libs are) INSTALL=/usr/ucb/install
MAKE=gmake

But thats not enough. At least one configure file will fail because
its really a bash shell script. So you have to change the top line from
/bin/sh to /bin/bash [ Yet Another Penguinism ]. Some Makefiles
have to be repaired due to hard coded install commands and usage
of GNU grep instead of Sun grep. On and on. Thats why it took all DAY

>>> It's hard to believe they would release a version of gcc without
>>> testing
>>> it properly on at the very least Solaris 10 on x86 and SPARC.
>> That would require skill sets they dont seem to possess
> It really is poor. I've looked at the 'wireshark' developers list, as I
> thought I might have some work building some addons to wireshark. They
> have a totally different attitude. They use a 'buildbot'
> http://buildbot.net/trac
> which automatically compiles the wireshark sources on multiple
> platforms, and sends an email to developers if there is a problem. It
> list the possible guilty parties - i.e. those that have committed code
> since it last built ok.

O that would never fly on the South Pole : >

> I'm not a wireshark developer, but they seem to be pretty keen on
> quality to me.

Its a blessing that program.

>>> I suspect the problem in the usual one - people don't make the effort
>>> to check that code builds properly on other platforms.
>> There is only Penguin OS...
>> There is only Intel...
>> Gee sounds almost like Mr. Bill all over again huh?
>
> It's certainly not Wolfram Research with Mathematica on Solaris. They
> support SPARC processors, as well as AMD processors on Solaris x86 but
> not Intel processors on Solaris x86. I can't understand the logic of
> supporting AMD, but not Intel on Solaris x86.
>
> http://www.wolfram.com/products/mathematica/platforms/
>
>> Seem to recall there is an initiative to test your software/equipment
>> on Sun equipment. i dont write software so i never followed up.
>>
>> Fact is there is no excuse as you can get a SPARC box for next to
>> nothing on eBay for a test platform and theres VMWare or Virtual Box
>> for FeeCees.
>
> I think the problem is people are not going to bother unless it is easy.

Doesnt give a whole lot of confidence in these people or their 'product'
does it?

> When I wanted portable code, I personally bought
> * IBM server running AIX
> * SGI Octane running IRIX
> * HP workstation running HP-UX
> * Dec Alpha for which I put tru64 on it. * Sun SPARC * Sun Intel
> and made some effort to get others to test on other platforms. I also
> used a Cray for which there is public access.

Thats going a bit far for a "small" project but well done I say.

> gcc developers have a very different attitude.

Thank goodness we can usually use Studio 11 or 12 now.
Im QUITE looking forward to the delivery of my Try & Buy
5120 with its 32 threads and T2 processor : >
Fun with dmake? Very likely!