Mac OS 10.6 -> Building Camino

Posted October 4th, 2009, 4:04 am

Yesterday I finally succeeded building Camino trunk (2.1a1pre) on Mac OS 10.6, using Xcode 3.2.

After a long time of trial and error...

Mac OS 10.6 is 64-bit as native, while Camino is far from 64-bit ready. So cross-compiling to 32-bit is required.
First hurdle was to cross-compile and install the required libIDL library, in 32-bit. Luckily MacPorts contain a universal libIDL, so after I got the hint about "versions" I got that going using the command - "sudo port install libIDL +universal".

Next out was to configure the .mozconfig for cross-compiling. I had success with this one:

Code: Select all: . $topsrcdir/camino/config/mozconfig mk_add_options MOZ_OBJDIR=@TOPSRCDIR@/../build mk_add_options MOZ_CO_PROJECT=camino mk_add_options MOZ_MAKE_FLAGS=-j4 ac_add_options --with-macos-sdk=/Developer/SDKs/MacOSX10.5.sdk ac_add_options --enable-optimize ac_add_options --enable-static ac_add_options --enable-application=camino ac_add_options --enable-macos-target=10.5 ac_add_options --disable-shared ac_add_options --disable-debug ac_add_options --disable-tests # Cross-compile 32-bit, see bug 477945 CC="gcc-4.0 -arch i386" CXX="g++-4.0 -arch i386" ac_add_options --target=i386-apple-darwin9.8.0 HOST_CC="gcc-4.0" HOST_CXX="g++-4.0" RANLIB=ranlib AR=ar AS=$CC LD=ld STRIP="strip -x -S" CROSS_COMPILE=1

So GCC 4.0, 10.5 SDK and target 10.5 is fine.
__________________________________________________________________

But all other compiler/SDK variations fails.
Note that GCC 4.2 and 10.5 SDK built just fine on Mac OS 10.5, but not on Mac OS 10.6...

GCC 4.0, 10.6 SDK and target 10.6:
The most promising, as it compiled for ~20 minutes before failing on PrintPDE (it seems) -> http://pastebin.mozilla.org/674431

Code: Select all: # ** BUILD FAILED ** # # # The following build commands failed: # PrintPDE:

GCC 4.2, 10.5 SDK and target 10.5:
Errors out almost instantly after beginning to compile -> http://pastebin.mozilla.org/674433

Code: Select all: /Users/username/Development/Camino/mozilla/js/src/jsbit.h:220: error: size of array ‘arg’ is negative

GCC 4.2, 10.6 SDK and target 10.6:
Errors out almost instantly after beginning to compile -> http://pastebin.mozilla.org/674434

Code: Select all: /Users/username/Development/Camino/mozilla/js/src/jsatom.h:69: error: size of array ‘arg’ is negative # make[4]: *** [jsarray.o] Error 1

Full logs available on request.

I know that none of these are supported build configurations, but would appreciate if someone more knowledgeable than me looked into it.
Thanks!

Posted October 5th, 2009, 1:59 am

Thanks for banging your head against a brickwall for us... - and for finding a solution ! :^)

All those build errors are in core Gecko 1.9.0 code. Not much hope of ever seeing that 'fixed', one way or another. Unless those are the result of bugs in Apple's developer tools.
The errors with GCC 4.2 and the 10.5sdk are very similar to what Al Billings had in bug 477945 (building Firefox 3.0 /Gecko 1.9.0).

----
How is the performance of the successful build (compared to an official build ?)

Posted October 5th, 2009, 9:49 am

phiw13 wrote:All those build errors are in core Gecko 1.9.0 code. Not much hope of ever seeing that 'fixed', one way or another. Unless those are the result of bugs in Apple's developer tools.
The errors with GCC 4.2 and the 10.5sdk are very similar to what Al Billings had in bug 477945 (building Firefox 3.0 /Gecko 1.9.0).

Since there are at least two others (Al Billings of MozQA and aaronr of XForms) who are apparently trying to do the 4.2/10.5 dance with Gecko 1.9.0 on 10.6 (and since that combination worked previously on 10.5), it can't hurt to file a bug (against the JS engine, I guess, since that's where the failure is) on the matter and cc those two.

At the very least you'll get a "this is not a supported config, so we won't look into it" answer and know for sure (since the JS engine is also a separate product, it might even officially support more configurations, so it might be "we'll look into it").

You'll want to have the full build log handy if you do file the bug; the snippet from where it errors isn't terribly useful, since the build command looks just like one in a successful build, so the error's further back, but I don't know where they'll want to see snippets from.

Posted October 5th, 2009, 9:56 am

My pleasure... ^_^
Yeah it seems to be related to Gecko code, so I guess getting fixes back here on 1.9.0 is minimal. At least there seems to be hope for the future, if we take on gecko 1.9.3 (or later).

----

No ran any performance comparison, so unsure if my builds run faster/slower than the official ones.
I just happen to like living on the "bleeding edge", with the latest trunk code compiled with the latest compiler and SDK.

Posted October 7th, 2009, 5:26 am

Has a bug been filed on this ?

(it is a bit difficult to do it myself as I don't have 10.6. yet).

Posted October 8th, 2009, 6:10 am

Ooops, totally missed the 'Uncle Asad' reply. Since we replied at the same time.
I will do my best to file a bug, then report back.

Edit:
Bug 521229 files. Please fill me in I have missed out of something... :-"

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=521229

Posted October 8th, 2009, 5:28 pm

Krmathis, so far so good. Keep up the good work, my friend.

Posted October 9th, 2009, 10:18 am

A bit sad to see Bug 521229 getting status "WONTFIX", but understandable...
Hopefully someone take on integrating Gecko 1.9.[3,4, ..] with Camino in the not too distant future. One can always cross fingers.

Posted October 9th, 2009, 11:35 am

krmathis wrote:A bit sad to see Bug 521229 getting status "WONTFIX", but understandable...
Hopefully someone take on integrating Gecko 1.9.[3,4, ..] with Camino in the not too distant future. One can always cross fingers.

Yeah, I'm personally a little worried about what's going to happen when the 1.9.0 branch goes unsupported and we're stuck without a build system...

Maybe you want to work on getting a mozilla-central build up and running instead? That's even more bleeding-edge

I know I'd be willing to help out.

cl

Posted October 9th, 2009, 2:17 pm

^ Well, if I knew my way around coding I would be pleased to.
But sadly I do not, or have the time taking on learning it, so compiling/testing/filing bugs it is...

Posted October 9th, 2009, 3:47 pm

You managed to get as far as you did with 1.9.0, so I think you're probably more capable of working this out than you think

cl

Mac OS 10.6 -> Building Camino

Who is online