Distributions using gcc 3.2 or later

Hi --

I need to test and improve modifications of GCC 3.2 or later on a IA64 as part of a demonstration that those modifications aren't IA32 specific. As it is, I am just now showing that I can build entire production quality Linux distributions with my (currently non-standard) compilers on IA32, and I want to extend that to a couple more platforms.

Intel has graciously short-term-loaned me a IA64. Before Christmas break, I poked around, and all the Linux distributions for IA64 seemed GCC 2.96 based, except for the Redhat rawhide distribution. But, testing with alpha-test distributions makes me nervous that I would be testing much more than my changes. Now that my compiler modification is starting to work, I thought I'd poke my head out and ask what distribution I should use that would expect GCC 3.2 or later?

Or perhaps, if you have a fork going in GCC for IA64, I should use it instead? The purpose is to propose inclusion of my modifications into the GCC main branch.

-- Perry Wagle ([email protected])

Ladies(are you around?) and guys,

can we quickly put together short up-to-date list of "stable" distros for IA64 plafrorm? You can mention what compiler and libc it is based and whether it's free or commercial

I am only aware of:

RedHat 7.2 gcc 2.96/glibc 2.2.4 freely available

Perry, what kind of modifications are you talking about? In what part of the compiler?

Cheers!

Martin

Debian 3.0 gcc 2.96/glibc 2.2.5 freely available

(for reference, the Debian unstable distribution is based on gcc 3.2/glibc 2.3.1)

randolph

Randolph Chung
Debian GNU/Linux Developer, hppa/ia64 ports
http://www.tausq.org/

Perry> Intel has graciously short-term-loaned me a IA64. Before Perry> Christmas break, I poked around, and all the Linux Perry> distributions for IA64 seemed GCC 2.96 based, except for the Perry> Redhat rawhide distribution. But, testing with alpha-test Perry> distributions makes me nervous that I would be testing much Perry> more than my changes. Now that my compiler modification is Perry> starting to work, I thought I'd poke my head out and ask what Perry> distribution I should use that would expect GCC 3.2 or later?

Debian/unstable also uses gcc-3.2. As you'd expect, this version isn't as solid as Debian/stable, but it's definitely usable (I'm running it on my McKinley workstation at work). The main thing is that stuff sometimes breaks temporarily (e.g., it seems the X server broke a couple of days ago), but usually those can be fixed by downgrading to the "stable" version of the package.

	--david

Boy, are you not looking very hard ;-) On www.linuxia64.org:

IA-64 Linux Distributions
# Caldera Systems (initial release 8/4/00) Download at ftp.caldera.com/pub/OpenLinux64 # Debian (initial release 8/10/01) Download at www.debian.org/ports/ia64 # Red Hat (initial release 5/17/00) Download at ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/ia64 # SuSE (initial release 6/13/00) Download at ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/ia64 # TurboLinux (initial release 3/13/00) Download at www.turbolinux.com/ia64.html

I'd think that initial release' is no longer a very useful thing to have, so perhaps this list should be replaced by a list of most recent release' instead. I don't see a `contact the webmaster' link, so maybe he or she reads this list...

Debian released Woody in 2002.
SuSE announced: "Enterprise Server 8 is also available for [...] HP Itanium 2-based servers, [...]"
Red Hat released AS & AW for ia64.

Not aware of any other announcements, but I don't follow that too closely.

"It's not Hollywood.  War is real, war is primarily not about defeat or
victory, it is about death.  I've seen thousands and thousands of dead bodies.
Do you think I want to have an academic debate on this subject?" -- Robert Fisk

Hi,

Mandrake Linux 8.1 gcc 2.96/glibc 2.2.4 freely available
There will be a 9.0 too, based on gcc 3.2[.X]/glibc 2.2.5.

Bye,
Gwenole.

Yes, I read the list. I pretty much put up whatever the distro's want. If anyone wants to change the page let me know and I'll take care of it.

Don Dugger
"Censeo Toto nos in Kansa esse decisse." - D. Gale
[email protected]
Ph: 303/652-0870x117

Well, I'd like to change the purpose of that list. Back when ia64 was new, I think there were significant bragging rights for First Distro!'. But I think we're beyond that now, and it'd be a more useful list if it has Most up to date release distro'. So I'd be in favour of something like:

<h2>IA-64 Linux Distributions</h2>
<li>Debian 3.0 (Woody) <a HREF ="http://www.debian.org/distrib/">Download instructions</a>
<li>Red Hat Advanced Workstation<a HREF="http://www.redhat.com/somewhere/i/can't/find/anything/on/their/website/">Information</a> <li>Red Hat Advanced Server <a HREF="http://www.redhat.com/somewhere/i/can't/find/anything/on/their/website/">Information</a> <li>SuSE Enterprise Edition <a HREF="http://www.suse.com/us/business/products/sles/sles7/sles_ia64/index.html">Information</a>

Obviously representatives from those companies should suggest better wording & URLs than this ;-)

Disagreements?

"It's not Hollywood.  War is real, war is primarily not about defeat or
victory, it is about death.  I've seen thousands and thousands of dead bodies.
Do you think I want to have an academic debate on this subject?" -- Robert Fisk

...

Sadly (from some viewpoints, anyway; I don't mean to comment on anyone's business practices, it's just that we've gotten *used* to this stuff being splattered all over the net), several of the distros are taking the position that Itanium 2 distributions will fit into high-end server products only, and will not be made available for free download, at least not as ready-to-burn ISOs. I think that's why you got the "can't-find-on-website" response for Red Hat AS/AW, for example.

So I'd vote for this approach:

if you want to be listed, send a note to the maintainer with a pointer to the best available "how to obtain" page for that product.

As mentioned before (Is this a FAQ yet?), you can also get access to ia64-linux machines at testdrive.hp.com.

grant