Re: gcc 3.2.1 in sid?
Jack Howarth writes:
Now that glibc 2.3.1 is in sid, what are the plans
for the transition to gcc 3.2.1?
we are waiting for an transition plan. My assumption was Jeff would
propose a transition plan for a _coordinated_ transition of glibc and
gcc. It seems a bit late for that :-(
I am assuming we are waiting for the official gcc 3.2.1 release.
we have to. Currently gcc-3.2 from the CVS branch is unbuildable due
to the new bison-1.50 version. You can find a backport of the bison
related patches in gcc-patches or in the Debian gcc CVS, but they
cause regressions in the testsuite.
That should be soon however.
From my point of view we have to finish the g++ transition plan first
(and if our transition plan is to simply switch and recompile ...).
Using gXX-2.95 to link object code built with gcc-3.2 asks for
trouble:
#include stdio.h
int main(int argc, char*argv[])
{
printf(%d\n, 16/argc);
}
Translate with:
gcc-3.2 -c div.c
gcc-2.95 -o div div.o
call: ./div onearg
prints 7, not 8.
Are we still planning a bulk rebuild of each arch?
I did not hear anything of a rebuild of C related packages, only C++
dependent packages.
I believe ppc should be in excellent shape
for the transition. The only worrisome arches are hppa
(glibc 2.3.1 is still broken there), mips and m68k (those
two will need libgcc-compat code added for glibc 2.3.1).
Is glibc-2.3 necessary for the transition on these architectures?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: gcc 3.2.1 in sid?
Jack Howarth writes:
Now that glibc 2.3.1 is in sid, what are the plans
for the transition to gcc 3.2.1?
we are waiting for an transition plan. My assumption was Jeff would
propose a transition plan for a _coordinated_ transition of glibc and
gcc. It seems a bit late for that :-(
I am assuming we are waiting for the official gcc 3.2.1 release.
we have to. Currently gcc-3.2 from the CVS branch is unbuildable due
to the new bison-1.50 version. You can find a backport of the bison
related patches in gcc-patches or in the Debian gcc CVS, but they
cause regressions in the testsuite.
That should be soon however.
From my point of view we have to finish the g++ transition plan first
(and if our transition plan is to simply switch and recompile ...).
Using gXX-2.95 to link object code built with gcc-3.2 asks for
trouble:
#include stdio.h
int main(int argc, char*argv[])
{
printf(%d\n, 16/argc);
}
Translate with:
gcc-3.2 -c div.c
gcc-2.95 -o div div.o
call: ./div onearg
prints 7, not 8.
Are we still planning a bulk rebuild of each arch?
I did not hear anything of a rebuild of C related packages, only C++
dependent packages.
I believe ppc should be in excellent shape
for the transition. The only worrisome arches are hppa
(glibc 2.3.1 is still broken there), mips and m68k (those
two will need libgcc-compat code added for glibc 2.3.1).
Is glibc-2.3 necessary for the transition on these architectures?
Re: gcc 3.2.1 in sid?
On Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 11:50:06PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: Jack Howarth writes: Now that glibc 2.3.1 is in sid, what are the plans for the transition to gcc 3.2.1? we are waiting for an transition plan. My assumption was Jeff would propose a transition plan for a _coordinated_ transition of glibc and gcc. It seems a bit late for that :-( Well, glibc can be built with gcc-3.2, but the arch still can use gcc-2.95, so organizing things seemed uneeded. From my point of view we have to finish the g++ transition plan first (and if our transition plan is to simply switch and recompile ...). Using gXX-2.95 to link object code built with gcc-3.2 asks for trouble: glibc compiled with gcc-3.2 and using gcc-2.95 for the standard compiler has been proven to work. Glibc provides special functionality to cope with this situation. -- Debian - http://www.debian.org/ Linux 1394 - http://www.linux1394.org/ Subversion - http://subversion.tigris.org/ Deqo - http://www.deqo.com/
