harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gregory Shimansky <gshiman...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [general] version of GCC...
Date Fri, 03 Nov 2006 13:29:24 GMT
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> Basically, I want to uplift my own platform to 4.x, and then work the 
> kinks out of that patch.
> I just want to know what X is.
> If no one says anything, I'll figure it out and declare it :)

You have to choose X between 0 and 1.

Either 4.0.x (which AFAIK is used in ubuntu already - 4.0.3) or 4.1.x 
(which are used in FC5 - 4.1.0 and Gentoo - 4.1.1). There are no later 
versions on gcc.gnu.org than 4.1.1.

I think 4.1.x is better because it is stricter than 4.0.x when compiling 
C++ (see [1]).

[1] http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.1/changes.html

> Gregory Shimansky wrote:
>> Egor Pasko wrote:
>>> On the 0x216 day of Apache Harmony Gregory Shimansky wrote:
>>>> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>>>>> did we ever bottom out on what range of GCC we'll support?
>>>>> I have a patch I want to commit that is known to not compile under
>>>>> 4.1.1...
>>>> Hmm no I don't remember such agreement. I think GCC is mostly
>>>> backwards compatible, and anything that compiles on 4.1.1 should
>>>> compile on previous versions. So it is better to support the latest
>>>> stable.
>>>> Not many people would like to install such GCC version, but someone
>>>> like me could at least give warnings that the most recent version of
>>>> GCC doesn't compile some code.
>>> yes, and comment JIRA accordingly (with suggested fix). This way we
>>> can support a very wide renge of GCCs constantly. I doubt I can use
>>> the latest GCC soon, so I cannot check patches constantly.
>> I think you could use 4.1.0 in Fedora Core 5. Since patch level 
>> shouldn't really affect the C++ compilation restrictions, the same 
>> patch should break on 4.1.0 as well.
>>> Does it make sense to use something CruiseControl-ish that walks
>>> around JIRA patches and reports statistics which of them build OK? I
>>> thought of such a tool recently.. Not a task I would dream to
>>> implement though.
>> It could be an overkill to check on all possible gcc versions on all 
>> possible distributions and all possible platforms... When someone who 
>> has some problematic platform/distribution/gcc lets us know that 
>> something doesn't compile, it is probably enough.


View raw message