Hi,
In some sense this project is a supplement project to "support GCCfss and gcc 4
in ON" project, but can be considered separately.
GCCfss (GCC for SPARC Systems) is a big step forward on sparc comparing to
/usr/sfw/bin/gcc.
Higher performance, higher reliability, internally supported.
GCCfs
Alexey Starovoytov wrote:
Hi,
In some sense this project is a supplement project to "support GCCfss and gcc 4 in
ON" project, but can be considered separately.
GCCfss (GCC for SPARC Systems) is a big step forward on sparc comparing to
/usr/sfw/bin/gcc.
Higher performance, higher reliability,
Alexey Starovoytov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In some sense this project is a supplement project to "support GCCfss and gcc
> 4 in ON" project, but can be considered separately.
>
> GCCfss (GCC for SPARC Systems) is a big step forward on sparc comparing to
> /usr/sfw/bin/gcc.
> Higher perfor
On Thu, 20 Jul 2006, Alexey Starovoytov wrote:
Hi,
In some sense this project is a supplement project to "support GCCfss and gcc 4 in
ON" project, but can be considered separately.
Alexey,
Are you proposing separate or shared project space for your two
proposals?
Eric
GCCfss (GCC for SP
On Fri, 21 Jul 2006, Rainer Orth wrote:
> I think I asked this before when you announced GCCfss on the main gcc list:
> how much work would it be to turn GCCfss into a generic (i.e. both sparc
> and x86) GCC with the Sun backend? It seems that the backend interface is
> identical between sparc an
On Fri, 21 Jul 2006, Eric Boutilier wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Jul 2006, Alexey Starovoytov wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > In some sense this project is a supplement project to "support GCCfss and
> > gcc 4 in ON" project, but can be considered separately.
>
> Alexey,
>
> Are you proposing separate or shared pro
Alexey Starovoytov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I hope the completion of each can be done separately. Meaning that
> inclusion of GCCfss into sfw (or other parts of ON if sfw is not approriate
> place), can be done sort of independently from support of it in ON.
> The goal, of course, is to have
Alexey,
> On Fri, 21 Jul 2006, Rainer Orth wrote:
>
> > I think I asked this before when you announced GCCfss on the main gcc list:
> > how much work would it be to turn GCCfss into a generic (i.e. both sparc
> > and x86) GCC with the Sun backend? It seems that the backend interface is
> > ident
Regarding current support for gcc 3.4.3 in Solaris, see below:
Rainer Orth wrote:
I think here's an important misunderstanding: this is not how free software
works. If Sun as a vendor or the OpenSolaris community as a whole rely on
GCC in some way (as Sun has done for the initial amd64 port),
Michael,
> Rainer Orth wrote:
>
> > I think here's an important misunderstanding: this is not how free software
> > works. If Sun as a vendor or the OpenSolaris community as a whole rely on
> > GCC in some way (as Sun has done for the initial amd64 port), it is their
> > responsibility to test G
"The exact version of GCC to be bundled" is an exhausting topic.
We can decide on the final GCCfss/gcc version latter.
That's why the proposal is named "support GCCfss and gcc 4 in ON"
I believe that the set of changes we have for ON will be equally useful
for any gcc 4.x version. Both sparc and
Alexey,
> "The exact version of GCC to be bundled" is an exhausting topic.
> We can decide on the final GCCfss/gcc version latter.
indeed :-)
> That's why the proposal is named "support GCCfss and gcc 4 in ON"
>
> I believe that the set of changes we have for ON will be equally useful
> for any
Thanks, Alexy. You have a +1 from Rainer. I'll contact you
offline to get you set up. (Sorry for the delay.)
Eric
On Tue, 25 Jul 2006, Alexey Starovoytov wrote:
"The exact version of GCC to be bundled" is an exhausting topic.
We can decide on the final GCCfss/gcc version latter.
That's why the
13 matches
Mail list logo
