Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: [PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortranbits)
Adrian Bunk schrieb am 13.10.2008 17:41:15: On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 04:42:08PM +0200, Markus Milleder wrote: snip Is there any reason not to demand 2.3.2 for GCC 4.4 ? Or even the newest MPFR version published before creating the GCC 4.4 release branch (which could be 2.3.3) ? Upgrading can cause the user some unneeded work. E.g. the next stable release of Debian will likely ship with 2.3.1 . So in this specific case fulfilling a 2.3.1 requirement would be easy, while a 2.3.2 requirement would make it much harder to build gcc 4.4 . Much harder ? I don't think anybody who tries to build GCC from source will have any problem building MPFR first. I can see how a distribution will probably want to have at least the MPFR version GCC demands, which would force an MPFR upgrade to accompany a GCC 4.4 package. And upgrading from 2.3.1 to let's say 3.0.0 might be a bad choice if the new version contains regressions. That's why I said before branching, this gives a time window to detect such regressions. While the cutoff date for moving to a new revision of MPFR may be somewhat earlier, my idea was to demand a rather current revision. Changing to 3.0.0 - which implies much larger changes than 2.3.3 - is IMHO stage 1 material, maybe stage 2 if the release notes make it exceedingly clear that the major version change is only because of major new features, with no changes to existing ones. Markus Milleder
Re: Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: [PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortranbits)
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 02:23:48PM +0200, Markus Milleder wrote: Adrian Bunk schrieb am 13.10.2008 17:41:15: ... And upgrading from 2.3.1 to let's say 3.0.0 might be a bad choice if the new version contains regressions. That's why I said before branching, this gives a time window to detect such regressions. While the cutoff date for moving to a new revision of MPFR may be somewhat earlier, my idea was to demand a rather current revision. Changing to 3.0.0 - which implies much larger changes than 2.3.3 - is IMHO stage 1 material, maybe stage 2 if the release notes make it exceedingly clear that the major version change is only because of major new features, with no changes to existing ones. You seem to wrongly assume gcc was bound to one specific MPFR version? If you force someone to upgrade from 2.3.1 to = 2.3.2 he will usually install the then-latest version, and that might be 3.0.0 . Markus Milleder cu Adrian -- Is there not promise of rain? Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. Only a promise, Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
Re: Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: [PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortranbits)
Markus Milleder wrote: I don't think anybody who tries to build GCC from source will have any problem building MPFR first. Not entirely true: Those of us who use cygwin and want to use the latest GCC have to first compile a non MPFR GCC (e.g. 4.1.x) before they can compile the latest GPFR and link GCC to it. This is not a big deal if you know that you have to do that, but if you don't know why the MPFR fails and wich snapshot you have to use as an immediate step it can be very frustrating. I would welcome a configuration option that disables all the MPFR related things. That would make compiling GCC on a naked cygwin installation *much* easier. Cheers, Nils Pipenbrinck
Re: Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: [PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortranbits)
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 1:28 PM, Nils Pipenbrinck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not entirely true: Those of us who use cygwin and want to use the latest GCC have to first compile a non MPFR GCC (e.g. 4.1.x) before they can compile the latest GPFR and link GCC to it. I don't really see any issue here. Because to compile GCC you need a compiler to begin with so compiling MPFR to start is easy, now if MPFR does not support older GCCs, we might need to rethink this. Thanks, Andrew Pinski
Re: Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: [PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortranbits)
Andrew Pinski wrote: On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 1:28 PM, Nils Pipenbrinck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not entirely true: Those of us who use cygwin and want to use the latest GCC have to first compile a non MPFR GCC (e.g. 4.1.x) before they can compile the latest GPFR and link GCC to it. I don't really see any issue here. Because to compile GCC you need a compiler to begin with so compiling MPFR to start is easy, now if MPFR does not support older GCCs, we might need to rethink this. Cygwin comes with a GCC 3.4.somewhat out of the box. To compile MPFR you need a 4.1 compiler. So you have to double compiling everything. And worse: You have to know that you have to do this. There is no information about that issue. Besides that: compiling GCC under cygwin takes *much* longer than under linux for example The config script alone (and there are more than one) need around 20 minutes. Nils
Re: Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: [PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortranbits)
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 2:14 PM, Nils Pipenbrinck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Cygwin comes with a GCC 3.4.somewhat out of the box. To compile MPFR you need a 4.1 compiler. So you have to double compiling everything. And worse: You have to know that you have to do this. There is no information about that issue. Why does MPFR requires 4.1.1? I have used GCC 3.3 and GCC 4.0.2 to compile it before. Besides that: compiling GCC under cygwin takes *much* longer than under linux for example The config script alone (and there are more than one) need around 20 minutes. That is a different issue, it comes down to Windows is not tuned for launching small programs over and over again. Thanks, Andrew Pinski
RE: Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: [PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortranbits)
Nils Pipenbrinck wrote on 14 October 2008 21:29: Markus Milleder wrote: I don't think anybody who tries to build GCC from source will have any problem building MPFR first. Not entirely true: Those of us who use cygwin and want to use the latest GCC have to first compile a non MPFR GCC (e.g. 4.1.x) before they can compile the latest GPFR and link GCC to it. Err... I don't. I build 4.3.x using 3.4.4. That's what the whole bootstrapping thing is about: it insulates you from your starting compiler version. I would welcome a configuration option that disables all the MPFR related things. That would make compiling GCC on a naked cygwin installation *much* easier. Why are you even building it at all, rather than just using the standard package in the distro? WJFFM. cheers, DaveK -- Can't think of a witty .sigline today
Re: Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: [PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortranbits)
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 02:23:48PM +0200, Markus Milleder wrote: Much harder ? I don't think anybody who tries to build GCC from source will have any problem building MPFR first. It is certainly an awkward annoyance, especially when you occassionally need to build gcc on many different boxes, with various distro versions. Obviously on your primary devel box you'll have a fresh mpfr installed (I still have 2.3.1 though), but if you need from time to time test on less often tested arches, strict version requirements just eat people's valuable time for no big benefit. Jakub
Re: Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: [PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortranbits)
On 2008-10-15 04:45:25 +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote: On 2008-10-14 14:19:22 -0700, Andrew Pinski wrote: On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 2:14 PM, Nils Pipenbrinck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Cygwin comes with a GCC 3.4.somewhat out of the box. To compile MPFR you need a 4.1 compiler. So you have to double compiling everything. And worse: You have to know that you have to do this. There is no information about that issue. Why does MPFR requires 4.1.1? I have used GCC 3.3 and GCC 4.0.2 to compile it before. Perhaps Nils mixed up with GMP. MPFR requires ***GMP*** version 4.1 or later. -- Vincent Lefèvre [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Web: http://www.vinc17.org/ 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: http://www.vinc17.org/blog/ Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / Arenaire project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)
Re: Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: [PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortranbits)
On 2008-10-14 14:19:22 -0700, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 2:14 PM, Nils Pipenbrinck
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Cygwin comes with a GCC 3.4.somewhat out of the box. To compile
MPFR you need a 4.1 compiler. So you have to double compiling
everything. And worse: You have to know that you have to do this.
There is no information about that issue.
Why does MPFR requires 4.1.1? I have used GCC 3.3 and GCC 4.0.2 to
compile it before.
You should be able to build MPFR with any C89 or C99 compiler.
However, functions mpfr_{set,get}_{uj,sj} are available only if
intmax_t and uintmax_t are available.
--
Vincent Lefèvre [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Web: http://www.vinc17.org/
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: http://www.vinc17.org/blog/
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / Arenaire project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)
Re: Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: [PATCH]: bump minimum MPFR version, (includes some fortranbits)
Nils Pipenbrinck wrote: Cygwin comes with a GCC 3.4.somewhat out of the box. To compile MPFR you need a 4.1 compiler. So you have to double compiling everything. And I don't know where you get that assertion but it's not true. mpfr built with gcc 3.4 works just fine and passes all tests in its testsuite. Besides, Cygwin has a binary package of mpfr 2.3.1 that you can just install, so you don't have to compile mpfr yourself at all. Brian
