On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 10:48:19AM +0000, David Pitt wrote:
> This info is baked into gcc4/Makefile. The following fixed it.
>
> GCC_CONFIG_ARGS += --with-pkgversion='GCCSDK GCC $(GCC_VERSION) Release 3' \
> --with-bugurl=http://gccsdk.riscos.info/
> BINUTILS_CONFIG_ARGS += --with-pkgversion='GCCSDK GCC $(GCC_VERSION) Release
> 3' \
> --with-bugurl=http://gccsdk.riscos.info/
> GDB_CONFIG_ARGS += --with-pkgversion='GCCSDK GCC $(GCC_VERSION) Release 3' \
> --with-bugurl=http://gccsdk.riscos.info/
>
> I tried to commit that but it does not appear to have worked.
You probably don't have commit rights - if you're going to be making more
changes I can make you an account.
I've committed a variant as r7129 - it's now a Makefile variable so is
easier to spot at the top of the file.
That's running through Jenkins (ci.riscos.info) now.
http://ci.riscos.info/job/gcc-4.7-native/124/
Yesterday I gave various of the CI machines a cleanout - Jenkins eats disc
for breakfast and several had tied themselves in knots (eg wouldn't boot).
Things should be back to normal now.
I started a full build of all the packages in the interests of cleaning the
cobwebs out of the infrastructure. Do we know how new packages need to be
to have ARMv8 support? Should we aim to do a full release of everything we
can build?
The list of things we can't build is a bit long:
http://ci.riscos.info/job/packages/
click on Last Failure for a full list.
I suspect some of the failures are simple - any help in fixing them up is
appreciated.
Theo
_______________________________________________
GCCSDK mailing list gcc@gccsdk.riscos.info
Bugzilla: http://www.riscos.info/bugzilla/index.cgi
List Info: http://www.riscos.info/mailman/listinfo/gcc
Main Page: http://www.riscos.info/index.php/GCCSDK
No comments:
Post a Comment