Re: "kicad" build fails on netbsd-9/i386

[Manuel Bouyer <bouyer%antioche.eu.org@localhost>]

On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 06:35:51PM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
> 
> "John D. Baker" <jdbaker%consolidated.net@localhost> writes:
> 
> > ld: ../common/libgal.a(wx_view_controls.cpp.o): in function `KIGFX::WX_VIEW_CONTROLS::onMotion(wxMouseEvent&)':
> > wx_view_controls.cpp:(.text+0x314f): undefined reference to `__atomic_fetch_add_8'
> > ld: pcm/libpcm.a(dialog_pcm_progress.cpp.o): in function `DIALOG_PCM_PROGRESS::AdvancePhase()':
> > dialog_pcm_progress.cpp:(.text+0x6c): undefined reference to `__atomic_store_8'
> > ld: pcm/libpcm.a(dialog_pcm_progress.cpp.o): in function `DIALOG_PCM_PROGRESS::SetDownloadProgress(unsigned long long, unsigned long long)':
> > dialog_pcm_progress.cpp:(.text+0xcd): undefined reference to `__atomic_store_8'
> > ld: dialog_pcm_progress.cpp:(.text+0xee): undefined reference to `__atomic_store_8'
> > ld: pcm/libpcm.a(dialog_pcm_progress.cpp.o): in function `DIALOG_PCM_PROGRESS::SetPackageProgress(unsigned long long, unsigned long long)':
> > dialog_pcm_progress.cpp:(.text+0x16b): undefined reference to `__atomic_store_8'
> > ld: dialog_pcm_progress.cpp:(.text+0x18c): undefined reference to `__atomic_store_8'
> > ld: pcm/libpcm.a(dialog_pcm_progress.cpp.o): in function `DIALOG_PCM_PROGRESS::updateUI()':
> > dialog_pcm_progress.cpp:(.text+0x221): undefined reference to `__atomic_load_8'
> > ld: dialog_pcm_progress.cpp:(.text+0x242): undefined reference to `__atomic_load_8'
> > ld: dialog_pcm_progress.cpp:(.text+0x30e): undefined reference to `__atomic_load_8'
> > ld: dialog_pcm_progress.cpp:(.text+0x623): undefined reference to `__atomic_load_8'
> > ld: dialog_pcm_progress.cpp:(.text+0x65a): undefined reference to `__atomic_load_8'
> > ld: pcm/libpcm.a(dialog_pcm_progress.cpp.o):dialog_pcm_progress.cpp:(.text+0xa60): more undefined references to `__atomic_load_8' follow
> > *** [kicad/kicad] Error code 1
> 
> Probably needs some sort of libatomic because our i386 targets an older
> CPU, I think i486, that doesn't have the instructions.
> 
> Personally, I am starting to treat i386 as suitable for small old
> machines doing embedded-ish stuff only, and at this point I am not even
> sure I have i386 hardware that can't run amd64.  But I applaud you for
> keeping after this!

When I was still running i386 on desktops, I think I did work around this
with something like
CFLAGS+= -march=i686
(from memory, this may not be the exact syntax).

Of course this will then run only on CPUs which supports the i686 
instruction set.

-- 
Manuel Bouyer <bouyer%antioche.eu.org@localhost>
     NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference
--