Re: [Qemu-devel] build failure on x86, any suggestions?

["C.W. Betts" <computers57@hotmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1979 bytes --]

On Saturday 15 March 2008 09:13:02 am Peter Volkov wrote:
> В Сбт, 15/03/2008 в 14:20 +0000, Paul Brook пишет:
> > On Saturday 15 March 2008, Peter Volkov wrote:
> > > Hello.
> > >
> > > I just wanted to point developers attention to the following bug:
> > > bugs.gentoo.org/212351 , comment #11 and further. The problem is that
> > > qemu does not compile any more on x86. I've tried recent snapshot
> > > (2008-03-15_05) and the problem persist there.
> >
> > You're almost certainly using gcc4.x. Don't do that.
>
> Paul, thank you for you answer. I do have gcc-4 installed on my system
>
> but I'm sure that I'm using gcc-3.4:
> > gcc --version

Try setting the compiler flags to use -march=pentium-mmx . That is the max 
setting for -march that qemu compiles on.  also, make sure that the compiler 
isn't sending any of the -msse functions.

I tried to build qemu using -msse -march=pentium3 and it spat out the same 
thing.

> gcc (GCC) 3.4.6 (Gentoo 3.4.6-r2 p1.5, ssp-3.4.6-1.0, pie-8.7.10)
>
> As I read FAQ this version should be supported. I've tried to build gcc
> without patches (ssp, pie, C++ support and some gentoo specific patches)
> but qemu build process still fails at the same place...
>
> > IIRC gentoo already has a big pile hacks for this. This kind of
> > breakage is exactly why those hacks haven't been merged into cvs.
> > They're papering over the problem rather than fixing it, so you should
> > expect them to need constant maintenance.
>
> Sorry, but what hacks are you talking about? The only hack I'm aware
> about is that all system is build with newer compiler while to build
> qemu I have to install old gcc.
>
> > As mentioned several times on this recently on this list, the proper
> > fix is to finish the TCG conversion. That will happen "when it's done".
>
> Eh, I saw you talking about this and I'm aware that this will definitely
> take time. That's why I asked for suggestion...

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 194 bytes --]