Tim Moore wrote > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:flightgear- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Sent: 24 July 2008 19:37 > To: FlightGear developers discussions > Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Legacy #ifdefs > > James Turner wrote: > > On 25 Jul 2008, at 01:07, Erik Hofman wrote: > > > >> I've just recently committed a patched version of JSBSim that did just > >> that and so far I've seen nobody complaining. > >> For me it's a rather simple issue; FlightGear 1.0 is the last version > >> for old(ish) hardware and compilers and FlightGear CVS is for new > >> hardrware and compilers etc. > >> > >> It would be great to clean op most (if not all) of this stuff, add > >> default c++ headers (and get rid of compilers.h). For IRIX I have come > >> up with a way to fix most of the problems just by adding > >> simgear/compatibility/<compiler> to the incldue path anyway. > > > > Right, I was looking at compilers.h and most of the cruft is to > > support GCC 2.8 and egcs-1.x - seriously old :) > > > > line 144 of simgear/compilers.h says it all: > > > > error Time to upgrade. GNU compilers < 2.7 not supported > > > > So, what would be a sensible minimum version of GCC to require? 3.2 > > would be my guess, or maybe 3.3. > > > > I'll work on some patches for the macintosh | __MWERKS__ | __APPLE__ > > stuff, FX / XMESA stuff is not controversial, but I'd want to avoid > > creating merges headaches for people working on OSG code. I guess > > cleaning up / getting rid of compilers.h will take longer. > I'm all for cleaning up the #ifdefs and #defines. As a baseline, we don't > need > to support compilers that are too broken to compile OpenSceneGraph, and we > would > like to support Cygwin. I believe that gives an oldest gcc version of > 3.4.4. > > Windows developers should chime in with their votes for the oldest VC > compiler > that needs to be supported. > > IRIX (and Solaris and HP) compilers are still used by some of our > developers, > and they have their own set of special bugs. However, I think that we can > count > on C++ standard header files being correct and that sort of thing. >
Last time I tried, I couldn't get OSG to compile using gcc3.4.4, which is the version currently available in Cygwin. This was the reason I migrated to MSVC8, and now 9. MSVC9 is available free for download from MS, and the 7.1 project files provided in CVS by Fred can be readily converted by MSVC9 for use. There is an overhead to running FGFS under Cygwin, so I see no reason to revert. Personally, I see no reason to continue to support Cygwin. 7.1 and 9 will cover all bases for Window users AFAIKS. I continue to use Cygwin for CVS, git and Terrasync (there's no Windows equivalent for the last that I know of). My 2 pence worth Vivian ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
