harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alexei Zakharov" <alexei.zakha...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [general] gcc version 4.x as our "default" compiler version?
Date Wed, 17 Jan 2007 13:23:37 GMT
However, I have libstdc++.so.6 as well as libstdc++.so.5 .

Regards,

2007/1/17, Alexei Zakharov <alexei.zakharov@gmail.com>:
> > > AFAIK there are no Linux distributions which have versions that
> > > don't have gcc 4.x included, it is the default compiler in all last
> > > distros versions. So all last (and maybe some before last) versions
> > > of Linux distros should have no problems with libstdc++.so.6.
>
> > I use RHEL4 update 4 and the default compiler is gcc 3.4.6.  It does
> > include an install of gcc 4.1.0, but it is named "gcc4" and "g++4".
>
> I've just made fresh installation of Debian Stable system. The newest
> available gcc release is 3.4.13. There is no gcc 4.x. Perhaps it is
> necessary to switch to "testing" (less stable) variant of the debian
> package tree to get gcc4.
>
> Regards,
>
> 2007/1/10, Naveen Neelakantam <neelakan@uiuc.edu>:
> >
> > On Jan 10, 2007, at 12:02 PM, Gregory Shimansky wrote:
> >
> > > Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> > >> In the past, we've talked about what versions of GCC we will
> > >> consider as our "supported" toolchain.  We noted that it's useful
> > >> to keep using other versions, such as 3.x, to make sure we're not
> > >> inadvertently hiding bugs through compiler bugs.
> > >> I'd like to tighten up this degree of freedom a little.
> > >> What's the harm if we declare 4.x as our default compiler
> > >> version?  What potential platforms do we lose, or who do we
> > >> inconvenience because requiring stdc++.so.6?
> > >
> > > AFAIK there are no Linux distributions which have versions that
> > > don't have gcc 4.x included, it is the default compiler in all last
> > > distros versions. So all last (and maybe some before last) versions
> > > of Linux distros should have no problems with libstdc++.so.6.
> >
> > I use RHEL4 update 4 and the default compiler is gcc 3.4.6.  It does
> > include an install of gcc 4.1.0, but it is named "gcc4" and "g++4".
> >
> > I am happy to switch to using the gcc 4.x install that I have, but I
> > am not sure how to tell the build infrastructure to use "gcc4"
> > instead of "gcc".  I did try building DRLVM by typing "./build.sh -
> > DCXX=gcc4" but I got the following error:
> >
> > --------------------
> > BUILD FAILED
> > /home/dcsfiles/neelakan/Sandbox/Harmony/stable/working_vm/build/make/
> > build.xml:432: The following error occurred while executing this line:
> > /home/dcsfiles/neelakan/Sandbox/Harmony/stable/working_vm/build/make/
> > build.xml:439: The following error occurred while executing this line:
> > /home/dcsfiles/neelakan/Sandbox/Harmony/stable/working_vm/build/make/
> > build_component.xml:72: The following error occurred while executing
> > this line:
> > /home/dcsfiles/neelakan/Sandbox/Harmony/stable/working_vm/build/
> > lnx_ia32_gcc4_debug/semis/build/targets/common_extra.xml:8: gcc4 is
> > not a legal value for this attribute
> > --------------------
> >
> > There are two other alternatives as I see it.  I could move the
> > "gcc4" and "g++4" binaries on my dev box over to "gcc" and "g++", but
> > that effectively changes the default compiler version for everyone
> > using the machine.  Our dev boxes are shared, so I don't like that
> > option.  The other alternative would be to install a version of gcc
> > 4.x into a private directory and set my path to point to it.  I can
> > do this, but should I be expected to?
> >
> > > This is a question of how old software (and hardware) we're going
> > > to support. Probably interested parties could backport the code to
> > > the old systems which is not only old Linux distros but also
> > > platforms like old Windows versions.
> > >
> > > For the officially built binaries which are supposed to be
> > > certified I think gcc 4.x is the right choice because soon it may
> > > happen that some platforms won't include even compatibility
> > > packages of libstdc++.so.5. For the unofficial distribution builds
> > > which insist on using 3.x (if they exist at all) they may send us
> > > patches to enable building on 3.x if they encounter problems.
> > >
> > >> I ran into this playing with Harmony on OLPC, and a developer
> > >> expressed a little surprise that we were still using 3.x.  I don't
> > >> follow the gcc ecosystem at all, so I don't know what issues there
> > >> are w/ 4.x, and why we wouldn't move forward to it as a general
> > >> (not strict) policy.
> > >
> > > I am surprised too. I tried to push moving to gcc 4.x because I use
> > > it on all systems and we've had cases when code which compiles on
> > > 3.x failed to compiled on 4.x because of more strict syntax checks.

-- 
Alexei Zakharov,
Intel ESSD

Mime
View raw message