[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Gcc v2.96 versus Trolltech QtEmbedded Window System

To: "Kevin D. Kissell" <>
Subject: Re: Gcc v2.96 versus Trolltech QtEmbedded Window System
From: "H. J. Lu" <>
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2002 09:00:16 -0700
In-reply-to: <023e01c22a5e$c013f120$10eca8c0@grendel>; from on Sat, Jul 13, 2002 at 01:15:54PM +0200
References: <023e01c22a5e$c013f120$10eca8c0@grendel>
User-agent: Mutt/
On Sat, Jul 13, 2002 at 01:15:54PM +0200, Kevin D. Kissell wrote:
> I am trying to build the GPL version of the Trolltech
> QT embedded windowing system on my Malta, using
> what I believe to be H.J. Lu's most recent tool chain:
> [root@localhost release-emb-generic]# g++ -v
> Reading specs from /usr/lib/gcc-lib/mipsel-redhat-linux-gnu/2.96/specs
> gcc version 2.96 20000731 (Red Hat Linux 7.3 2.96-110.1)
> The QT build process is a little unusual - the configure
> script causes a fairly huge (640KB) C++ source file
> to be generated, which is then thrown at the compiler.
> I would expect that to take a while, but after about 
> 20 hours with zero output passed to the assembler
> stage (it runs with -pipe) and the gradual accretion
> of about 90MB of virtual memory (on my poor 32MB
> system) I concluded that it was probably trapped in
> an infinite loop.  As I have seen this sort of thing occur
> in the past in optimizer stages, I hacked the makefile
> to replace -O2 with -O0.  It hasn't run for 20 hours
> at -O0 yet, but after a couple of hours the memory 
> allocation dynamic looks to be the same, only faster
> (72MB after only a couple of hours), so I'm not
> optimistic.
> My questions to the assembled panel of experts are:
> Are there known problems with gcc in
> this regard?

Have you tried the same C++ code with the same version of the cross
toolchain on Linux/x86? It may just take huge amount of memory.

> Is there a native toolchain that would be more 
> likely to be able to handle the build of QT?
> I'm considering trying the 2.95 set on Maciej's
> site out of desperation.

You can try my gcc 3.1 for RedHat 7.3. But it may need more memory.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>