This is the mail archive of the cygwin-apps mailing list for the Cygwin project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: GCC-4.7.2-2: Go/No-go?

On 2013-04-10 11:56, Dave Korn wrote:
   It takes 11 hours on a triple-core machine at -j6 to build and package GCC.
  In order to guarantee consistent reproduction I always respin the built
package from -src package through two generations.  It then takes three to
five days to run enough of the testsuite to be confident that the packaged
compiler works well.  So it'd be next week at the earliest.

While your diligence is admirable, I think some common sense review can be used here, as only one of my patches actually affects the compiler itself, and even then only the specs. I'm not exactly messing around with code generation here.

BTW, in your absence, it was agreed that gcc3 should go away and that gcc4 should be *the* gcc in the distro. This will simplify the build and drop the dep on 'alternatives'. Can this get into the next release?

I don't understand why there's a libquadmath0-devel; like the other C libraries, this should just be part of gcc-core. This was only necessary for libstdc++, and only so long as .la files were included. IIRC we agreed to remove them, but your reason for not doing so in the .cygport isn't clear to me.

Also, could you please explain the reasons for the ehdebug, execstack, and shared-libgcc patches?


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]