https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60933
--- Comment #15 from Leif Leonhardy ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #14)
> Fixed.
In trunk that is.
In GCC 6.1.0 we still have
$ egrep -iw 'gmp|mpfr|mpc' src/gcc-6.1.0/contrib/download_prerequisites
MPFR=mpfr-2.4.2
GMP=gmp-4.3.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60933
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60933
--- Comment #13 from Andreas ---
Indeed, contrib/download_prerequisites now points to the latest versions of
gmp, mpfr and mpc. Thanks!
It would be nice if you could keep this up to date with our next releases; we
will be happy to work together
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60933
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egall at gwmail dot gwu.edu
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60933
--- Comment #11 from Leif Leonhardy ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #2)
> We've had situations in the past where the minimum suggested versions work
> and the latest versions prevented GCC from building.
Well, in the past... ;-)
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60933
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|SUSPENDED |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60933
--- Comment #9 from Eric Botcazou ---
> As stated in my report, there is no problem with mentioning the minimal
> versions of helper libraries required to compile gcc. The problem is with
> actively promoting outdated versions, which can be helped
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60933
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Andreas from comment #7)
> Even if you are weary of the latest and greatest version, a position I can
> understand, you should not actively distribute releases that have been
> unmaintained for
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60933
--- Comment #7 from Andreas ---
As stated in my report, there is no problem with mentioning the minimal
versions of helper libraries required to compile gcc. The problem is with
actively promoting outdated versions, which can be helped by choosing
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60933
--- Comment #6 from Vincent Lefèvre ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #5)
> But, again, other software packages don't do that so I'm not sure why GCC
> should do it
I'm not aware of other software packages that provide such old versions
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60933
--- Comment #5 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Alternatively you should say that:
> * these minimal versions should be used with GCC only, and should not be
> installed on the system;
> * bugs related to them should be reported to some GCC mailing-list,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60933
--- Comment #4 from Vincent Lefèvre ---
Alternatively you should say that:
* these minimal versions should be used with GCC only, and should not be
installed on the system;
* bugs related to them should be reported to some GCC mailing-list, not to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60933
--- Comment #3 from Vincent Lefèvre ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #1)
> It's common practice to list the minimally required versions of dependencies
> for software packages, so I'm not sure why we shouldn't do it for GCC.
I don't th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60933
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
We've had situations in the past where the minimum suggested versions work and
the latest versions prevented GCC from building. The suggested versions are
known to work and have been thoroughly tested, which
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60933
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |SUSPENDED
Last reconfirmed|
15 matches
Mail list logo
