This is the mail archive of the ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the eCos 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: Re: eCos tools' gcc minor version


On Wed, 2002-02-13 at 16:42, Jonathan Larmour wrote:
> Robin Farine wrote:
> > 
> > On Tue, 2002-02-12 at 16:05, I wrote:
> > 
> > > But since the gcc version is 2.95.x
> > 
> > Or is it really gcc-2.9.x, something different from 2.9x.y?
> 
> Indeed so. The recent official GCC release timeline went like:
> 
> 2.7.x
> 2.8.x
> 2.95.x
> 3.0.x
> 
> The .95 indicating that it was "nearly 3.0". There never was an official
> 2.9, although the public GCC CVS repository called itself 2.9-something,
> which is why Cygnus (as it then was) used that as the basis of release
> numbers at the time.
> 

Ah, now it becomes a little clearer. So this Cygnus gcc version
corresponds more or less to egcs-1.1.1 (wich became gcc-2.9[01])?

For an StrongARM target, may I safely use the vanilla gcc-2.95.3 patched
with ecos-gcc-2952.patch from the Red Hat website (the reload1.c chunk
removed since it seems 2.95.3 includes a fix for this), or should I
better use a pre-2.95.4 CVS snapshot?

Thanks,

Robin



Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss


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