Updating GCC on Centos 5.2

Sure, here you go.

I have done yum install gcc-c++ as suggested, which has updated gcc to 4.1.2 20080704 (Red Hat 4.1.2-44).

I have compared the two log files and the output looks somewhat more promising, I am currently running make, but I suspect it may take a while to complete, so I will post an update tomorrow.

Have attached the new config.log for you to look at if you wish.

What cflags should I be using (if any) when building GCC? Seems we are using "-g -O2".

Since I have never built GCC before, I was wondering if it was a good/bad idea to build 4.3.3, and then re-build it (using itself) with the cflags/march optimized for a Core2 processor.

Jim

rebuilding gcc will take some time but please post any output later.

As for rebuilding to take advantage of additional optimisations, my only concern would be any requirements on glibc....if you need to start upgrading glibc, you may want to put the brakes on and wait for an updated CentOS.

Keep going but sound an alarm if glibc is mentioned!

Mark

My console session timed out so I was unable to confirm that it built successfully
 
I have updated binutils to the latest version (2.19.1), previous version was 2.17, although I suspect that it wont make a great deal of difference.
 
I am rebuilding with the following configure
../configure --prefix=/usr --enable-threads=posix
cc is currently installed in /usr/bin and I think make install would want install to /usr/local/bin by default, so is it correct to specify a --prefix=/usr?
 
No errors yet, but I am getting a few warnings, for example:
../../gcc/config/i386/i386.md:19425: warning: operand 1 missing mode?
../../gcc/expr.c:4567: warning: cast discards qualifiers from pointer target type
../../../libjava/interpret-run.cc: In static member function 'static void _Jv_InterpMethod::run(void*, ffi_raw*, _Jv_InterpMethod*)':
../../../libjava/interpret-run.cc:2352: warning: label 'invokeinterface_resolved' defined but not used
 
Once the make is complete I will run make -k check and post the results (hopefully the test takes less than 3 hours to run)

Build has completed and I am currently running the check, unfortunately I have 8 fails so far.

FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/builtin-math-4.c  -O0  (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/builtin-math-4.c  -O1  (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/builtin-math-4.c  -O2  (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/builtin-math-4.c  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer  (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/builtin-math-4.c  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops  (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/builtin-math-4.c  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-all-loops -finline-functions  (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/builtin-math-4.c  -O3 -g  (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/builtin-math-4.c  -Os  (test for excess errors)

Attached log, zipped as it is fairly large.
I will follow up with the complete log when the check is complete.

Yeah, I normally wouldnt have specified the prefix....but it wont make any difference to the compile....just the "make install" part.

Mark

make check didnt make it to the end.

13 fails (including the 8 previously mentioned) and 1 unexpected pass.

Full log attached.

Wow...thats a huge log to try to go through. I've just downloaded it and will try to get a look through it later today

Nothing obvious is jumping out at me here.
If you have the ability, I'd suggest you put the zip file up onto a webserver somewhere and post your question to the gcc list.
I'm sure that one of the developers will see the problem far quicker than I could given the 10 minute speed read I've just done.

The GCC mailing list - gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org may offer you greater assistance.

Best of luck....sorry I couldnt be of more assistance in this case; always difficult without the shell :-)

Mark

Good news. Got GCC 4.3.3 to build on CentOS 5.2. I don't consider myself an expert, but here are my thoughts, and what I did:

Don't replace the system GCC setup, libs, etc. I think it is actually a bad idea to use --prefix=/usr. If you are installing newer libraries/apps you should consider that CentOS packages are dependant on the SYSTEM released version not your LOCAL version. So let things go to /usr/local. To quote the MPFR FAQ:

"The best solution is to add /usr/local/include to your C_INCLUDE_PATH environment variable and to add /usr/local/lib to your LIBRARY_PATH and LD_LIBRARY_PATH environment variables (and/or LD_RUN_PATH)."

GCC needs the math libraries GMP and MPFR to build. These are included on CentOS, but GCC config said the version installed was buggy. So I downloaded both, compiled and installed them to /usr/local. Took 5 minutes.

However, in CentOS/Redhat, the usr/local paths are not searched for C_INCLUDE_PATH, LD_LIBRARY_PATH, etc as other systems generally do. A bug some say.

To add your newly installed /usr/local/libs under Redhat/CentOS, there are a few tricks:

Add your library-paths (in this case /usr/local) to
# /etc/ld.so.conf
and run
# /sbin/ldconfig -v
Your paths will be recognized

I *didn't* do the following, but I should have. Luckily the installed math headers and the new local ones were close enough. Perhaps the "--with-mpfr" gcc config options took care of this, but I have also read they aren't 100% reliable. So add the paths to be sure. Assuming you are running bash, add these to your profile:

export C_INCLUDE_PATH=$C_INCLUDE_PATH:/usr/local
export CPLUS_INCLUDE_PATH=$CPLUS_INCLUDE_PATH:/usr/local

Here is my build:

In gcc source directory, mkdir objdir, cd objdir, then config:

../configure --with-cpu=i686 --enable-shared --enable-threads=posix --with-system-zlib --enable-languages=c,c++ --with-gmp=/usr/local --with-mpfr=/usr/local

From further reading, next time I may do this (as these extra options are very common in full builds I have googled):

../configure --with-cpu=i686 --enable-shared --enable-threads=posix --enable-checking=release --with-system-zlib --enable-__cxa_atexit --disable-libunwind-exceptions --enable-languages=c,c++ --with-gmp=/usr/local --with-mpfr=/usr/local

Full build completed without errors.

Caveat!

I haven't run make check nor tested the build, since it is late. Plan on doing so tomorrow. I'm posting because I got it to work without errors, and maybe you want to replicate it so we can compare notes. Hope this helps!

-Brian