I have been trying to go through this tutorial and I always get stuck in the second build of GCC when making the cross-toolchain. It errors out saying that I am attempting to call a poisoned calloc. I have gone through several patches and what they all seem to do is just #include the offending system header (in this case pthread.h) earlier in the source code. Since there are no patches for my particular problem, I have gone ahead and emulated their solutions in my case. While this works (compilation now fails because I don't have some ISL files) it feels like a hack, and I suspect that the root problem is further back in the build.
Thus, I wanted to ask:
Why are symbols poisoned? Why would the GCC maintainers want some symbols not to be used?
What are the general causes for this problem? Is it really just a bug or is this a problem that arises in more general situations?
I am more interested in the generalities of this issue, but if it helps, I am using the latest release of Alpine Linux (with gcc 12.2.1) trying to compile gcc 11.2
.0 for the same target architecture as the host (x86-64).
Related
While working for just one month with the MPLABX5.5 + XC32 3.01 I've already had 3 separate instances where code compiled incorrectly, causing my program to fail after either the stack or frame pointer began using an incorrect address. I would like to dump these tools and try something else as tracking down compiler errors is sucking up too much of my time. Is there anything else available that I can use to work with a PIC32MM? Even access to a different compiler than XC32 might help.
I would like to do the same thing. Maybe we can collect the best options for how to get there, as after many many tries, I haven't yet been successful. As one starting point, I'd also like to be able to recompile xc32-gcc from source to understand exactly what it's doing, and to be able to compile xc32 binaries for other architectures (like, as insane as it may sound, I'd like to compile some code for the pic32mm platform with clang or gcc running on a raspberry pi.)
I would love to be able to even just compile xc32-gcc from source. I know this is possible, but I've not been successful. Some links and starts:
https://github.com/zeha/xc32
This seems to be the most recent grouping of source I've found, but I haven't yet figured out how to compile it.
ChipKit is cited a lot, but, I haven't gotten to the bottom of getting that to build for me either. There are numerous projects here, and I'm not sure how they all fit together yet:
https://github.com/chipKIT32
I suspect somebody (maybe someone who will see this post) knows the formula or script or docker file, or whatever to make this simple.
https://gitlab.com/spicastack/pic32-parts-free
This project seems close to what we're talking about, but, the
recommended way to install is with podman and gentoo. I'm not a
gentoo person (yet?), and the docker version failed for me. It's
probably a simple fix to the dockerfile for a gentoo person, but.. I
didn't get there yet. (I did try installing gentoo and started down
the path but holy cow, talk about being down a rabbit hole when what
I'm trying to do is get a pic cross-compiler working.. when emerge on my new gentoo install failed with a python error, I gave up.)
https://github.com/andeha/Twinbeam
This project also says some of the "right things" about building pic32 code using llvm, and has references to llvm2pic32 in this project: https://github.com/andeha/Sprinkle
I've also not yet managed to get this to make viable intel hex files that I can use on a pic just yet, but there's promise.
Use clang/llvm to generate code. I think it will compile C and generate mips out of the box and I've gotten that far, but I can't get it to link and produce a valid hex file yet. The linker scripts from microchip seem sort of ok, but the hex files end up putting the code in the wrong place, I think. I should probably put together a blinky-light example and try to push it farther, and share it with others to figure out what the deal is, but even stepping one step further back and just trying to get a super simple mips assembly program to get linked and be uploadable to a PIC32MM part would be a great success to me.
Maybe others have better references and links?
I have some C++ code using NEON intrinsics. From what I have read, all you need to do is include arm_neon.h to your project.. And then I read that this arm_neon.h header is not actually readily available to you automatically, you have to get it from the web. So I found and added this version to my project:
http://clang.llvm.org/doxygen/arm__neon_8h-source.html
In my project's prefix.pch I added:
#import "arm_neon.h"
And when I try to build on my iPhone6 device (I am not using the simulator), I get a billion errors inside the arm_neon.h file:
Can anyone please explain to me what I am missing here?
You've been misinformed about being able to pick up an arm_neon.h from the Internet. Generally the header is not just compiler specific, but compiler version (even compiler revision) specific. For GCC it relies on a number of compiler built in function calls, and from your screenshot of Clang the same holds there. As you'd expect, if the name of these internal-only functions changes, the header will fail to compile.
What surprises me is that you're unable to use an include of whichever arm_neon.h ships with your build environment. The only thing I can think of that would cause this is the build command trying to build for x86_64 (for the simulator) but you say this isn't what is happening. It might be worth checking your build settings one more time.
If you're still not getting anywhere, remember that arm_neon.h is sometimes considered as a system header, so in C++ you might need to #include <arm_neon.h> rather than #include "arm_neon.h" to get the compiler to search the system paths.
I'm trying to build apple's opensource libc (from http://www.opensource.apple.com/source/Libc/Libc-763.11/) on my OS X 10.6.8 laptop. This is in an attempt to essentially get a locally generated replica of /usr/lib/libSystem.B.dylib, which I intend to experiment on further.
I see a couple basic roadblocks though (unless, obviously, I'm missing something basic):
No instructions on how to do the build. There are a couple of Makefiles in the URL I reference above, but they fail to build when I try to do straightforward makes:
$make -f Makefile
Makefile:14: *** missing separator. Stop.
I suspect the source available for download is incomplete. Not incomplete in the sense that Apple isn't revealing all of the changes, but incomplete in the sense that there are source files that were (presumably) not modified by Apple, so isn't included in the collection. For example, I don't see the implementation of the "open" call (which, in the gnu libc hierarchy, is available at io/open.c)
The closest reference I could find after some googling was this: http://www.projectosx.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=1922&st=0&p=12457&#entry12457 but it still isn't close enough for my taste!
Any pointers?
Thanks!
Only some general pointers (although some links are discussing older OSX versions):
http://darwinbuild.macosforge.org/trac/ticket/6
http://sources.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/gentoo-projects/darwin/overlay/sys-libs/libc-darwin/libc-darwin-391.ebuild?view=markup&sortby=log
http://althenia.net/wiki/darwin#standard_library_libc
http://dev.gentoo.org/~vapier/CROSS-COMPILE-GUTS
http://www.raccoonfink.com/fink/darwin-cross/
I'm trying to port some very old fortran code to windows. I'd like to use mingw and f2c, which has no problem converting the code to usable C on OS X and Ubuntu. I used f2c.exe as distributed by netlib on a fresh install of mingw, and it translated the code fine. I have a "ported" version of libf2c that seems to still contain some unresolved references -- mostly file i/o routines (do_fio, f_open, s_wsfe, e_wsfe) and, peculiarly, one arithmetic routine (pow_dd). To resolve these issues, I tried to build libf2c from source, but ran into an issue during the make process. The make proceeds to dtime_.c, but then fails due to a dependency on sys/times.h, which is no longer a part of the mingw distro. There appears to be a struct defined in times.h that defines the size of a variable in dtime_.c, specifically t and t0 on lines 53 and 54 (error is "storage size of 't' isn't known"; same for t0).
The makefile was modified to use gcc, and make invoked with no other options passed.
Might anyone know of a workaround for this issue? I feel confident that once I have a properly compiled libf2c, I'll be able to link it with gcc and the code will work like it does on linux and os X.
FOLLOW-UP: I was able to build libf2c.a by commenting out the time related files in the makefile (my code does not contain any time related functions, so don't think it will matter). I copied it to a non-POSIX search directory as show in -print-search-dirs, specifically C:\MinGW\lib\gcc\mingw32\3.4.5. That seems to have fixed the issue on the unresolved references, although the need to eliminate the time files does concern me. While my code is now working, the original question stands -- how to handle makefiles that call for sys/times.h in mingw?
Are you sure the MinGW installation went correct? As far as I can tell the sys/times.h header is still there, in the package mingwrt-3.18-mingw32-dev.tar.gz. I'm not familiar with the gui installer, but perhaps you have to tick a box for the mingwrt dev component.
I have a 32 bit machine and I am running Ubuntu 9.10 on it. I have the latest gcc compiler. The problem that I am facing is that I have a library developed in 2002. The code is correct for sure but when I try to built it, it gives me errors like iostream.h cannot be found, error: fstream.h: No such file or directory etc etc. There are lots of files hence I cannot change them.
Can these errors be solved if solved I install gcc 3.0 ? If yes how to install it over my existing gcc compiler.
You're dealing with a pre-standard C++ library, and you've seen it won't compile with a standard compiler. You can always try the quick work-around by creating, say, iostream.h with the two lines #include <iostream> and using namespace std;, and that may work. It isn't reliable, and may cause hard-to-find bugs that will appear at an inconvenient time.
If this is a library from somewhere else, you could see if it's been updated.
The thing to realize is that the code isn't correct anymore. It may have been correct for some implementation at some time, but it isn't now. (Are you sure it was originally for gcc 3.0? Pre-standard compilers were, well, not standard, and had a lot of oddities. Avoiding that is what standards are for.) If you do install the original system, you may be unable to interface with the library properly, and new code isn't going to work. A library that doesn't interface with modern code is of limited use.
Otherwise, you're going to have to abandon the attitude that you can't change the library, and convert it to standard C++. There will likely be quite a few bugs that are fairly easy to fix (like the scope in for (int i = 0;...)), and may be some subtler problems. The code may have been correct for a certain compiler, but it isn't now.
The fstream.h and similar files are pre-standard versions of the fstream and similar files specified by the C++ Standard that come with modern compilers. The two are not typically compatible. Frankly, if no-one has updated the library to comply with the standard in the last 8 years, it is unlikely to be worth using.
Why couldn't you write a script to search and replace all instances of
#include <iostream.h>
with
#include <iostream>
And the same for the others?
Update:
I agree with the other answer, and the comments below... I'll leave this answer though because I don't think the statement
There are lots of files hence I cannot
change them
is valid :)