Thanks for the information. I am tying to get the packages using the
Time Machine, but all I am getting is an error, "unable to get
setup.ini" from the different ftp addresses I have tried. I sent an
email to the link at the bottom of the page, so hopefully they will be
able to help me with that.
I am interested in whether or not there is some good reason for not
using gcc3 anymore, but perhaps this is outside the bounds of this list.
I would also like to know why setup-x86.exe is configured to find and
physically remove the gcc3 packages. It's like someone decided, "you're
not allowed to have those anymore, so we are going to take them away".
Since the compiler bin was already labeled gcc-3/g77-3, why would it
have been a problem to leave the the bin files where they were? It
doesn't appear as if they would have caused a problem. My make files
were already configured to point to gcc-3 and not to whatever "which
gcc" would return.
Someone always has to decide how these things will work, and I assume
that is not easy in all instances. Still, I would expect there to be a
very good reason why someone would go to the bother of trolling around
in someone's file system and get rid of things that the user put there
intentionally. If there isn't a compelling reason, I would find that
rather odd and worth some discussion.
LMH
Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote:
On 8/19/2013 3:13 PM, LMH wrote:
I would be happy to build gcc-3 myself, I'm just looking for some
documentation to get that done.
I don't have a direct pointer for you but I'm sure you can find something
while looking around the net. gcc.gnu.org might be the best place to get
some basic info about building gcc though. Of course, there's no reason
you can't just grab the old Cygwin source package and try to build it from
there. But unless that process intrigues you, I'd recommend skipping the
extra effort and just installing the package from the "Cygwin Time
Machine".
<snip>
Was there some particular reason to physically remove the gcc-3 bin
from my
cygwin install? What would have been the harm in leaving it there,
since I
already had it installed? I think that many cygwin users would find it
useful to have the gcc3 packages included in the cygwin package manager,
even if they are in the obsolete section.
The Cygwin package for gcc-3 is no longer supported. gcc-3 hasn't been
supported by the gcc folks for quite a while (I believe the last
release by them was back in 2005). Cygwin delivered it as a package
for quite a while after that simply because 'setup.exe' required
it to build. But this has subsequently changed so support for it has
since been dropped. As I mentioned, there is a separate service that
Peter Castro maintains called the "Cygwin Time Machine". You can find
older versions of Cygwin and its packages through this service.
Everything available through that service is no longer supported by Cygwin
or this list of course.
If the packages still exist and can be installed manually, I would
love to
know where to find the packages and documentation. If I have to build it
from src, that is fine to, but some documentation would really be helpful
there as well.
Again, I'd recommend just pulling what you want from the "Cygwin Time
Machine" if you just want the binary packages. See:
<http://www.fruitbat.org/Cygwin/index.html#cygwintimemachine>
Of course, if you do want the sources, you can grab those from the same
place.
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple