Re: gmp/mpfr status

2008-03-18 Thread NightStrike
On 3/18/08, Tim Prince [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've been building gcc 4.3 and 4.4 with mpfr upgraded to 2.3.1, taking the gmp provided by cygwin. gcc build doesn't complain about mpfr 2.3.0 until you get to a few testsuite failures, but there seems no point in using less than 2.3.1. The

RE: gmp/mpfr status

2008-03-18 Thread David Billinghurst
From: NightStrike Is there an approximate timeline for when the gmp and mpfr packages will be upgraded to the minimum required for compiling gcc? Really, I guess it's just mpfr that has to be upgraded to 2.3.0., but I think mpfr 2.3.0 requires gmp 4.2.2. I have working packages of

Re: gmp/mpfr status

2008-03-18 Thread Bobby McNulty
-- From: David Billinghurst [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 6:35 AM To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: RE: gmp/mpfr status From: NightStrike Is there an approximate timeline for when the gmp and mpfr packages will be upgraded

Re: gmp/mpfr status

2008-03-18 Thread Brian Dessent
Bobby McNulty wrote: I have been going nuts trying to get gmp 4.2.2 to work. thanks for doing this, David. Much appreciated. What in the world are you doing that's causing so much trouble? They always have built out of the box with default options just fine for me, including 2.3.1 and 4.2.2

Re: gmp/mpfr status

2008-03-18 Thread Brian Dessent
Bobby McNulty wrote: It built fine. Installed. Got to build mpfr 2.31, and gmp 4.2.2 kept showing 4.2.1. That's because toplevel configure will find the system gmp header in /usr/include unless you pass --with-gmp=prefix you built gmp with and --with-mpfr=prefix you built mpfr with. Brian --

Re: gmp/mpfr status

2008-03-18 Thread Bobby McNulty
- Original Message - From: Brian Dessent [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: cygwin@cygwin.com Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 9:33 AM Subject: Re: gmp/mpfr status Bobby McNulty wrote: I have been going nuts trying to get gmp 4.2.2 to work. thanks for doing this, David. Much appreciated. What

Re: gmp/mpfr status

2008-03-18 Thread Bobby McNulty
- Original Message - From: Brian Dessent [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: cygwin@cygwin.com Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 9:55 AM Subject: Re: gmp/mpfr status Bobby McNulty wrote: It built fine. Installed. Got to build mpfr 2.31, and gmp 4.2.2 kept showing 4.2.1. That's because toplevel

Re: gmp/mpfr status

2008-03-18 Thread Bobby McNulty
Bobby McNulty wrote: It built fine. Installed. Got to build mpfr 2.31, and gmp 4.2.2 kept showing 4.2.1. That's because toplevel configure will find the system gmp header in /usr/include unless you pass --with-gmp=prefix you built gmp with and --with-mpfr=prefix you built mpfr with. Brian

Re: gmp/mpfr status

2008-03-18 Thread NightStrike
On 3/18/08, Brian Dessent [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bobby McNulty wrote: It built fine. Installed. Got to build mpfr 2.31, and gmp 4.2.2 kept showing 4.2.1. That's because toplevel configure will find the system gmp header in /usr/include unless you pass --with-gmp=prefix you built gmp

Re: gmp/mpfr status

2008-03-18 Thread Bobby McNulty
Bobby McNulty wrote: It built fine. Installed. Got to build mpfr 2.31, and gmp 4.2.2 kept showing 4.2.1. That's because toplevel configure will find the system gmp header in /usr/include unless you pass --with-gmp=prefix you built gmp with and --with-mpfr=prefix you built mpfr with. He

Re: gmp/mpfr status

2008-03-17 Thread Tim Prince
NightStrike wrote: Is there an approximate timeline for when the gmp and mpfr packages will be upgraded to the minimum required for compiling gcc? Really, I guess it's just mpfr that has to be upgraded to 2.3.0., but I think mpfr 2.3.0 requires gmp 4.2.2. I've been building gcc 4.3 and 4.4