g++-3 and g77-3 packages under setup-x86.exe

[LMH]

Thanks for the information. I am tying to get the packages using the 
Time Machine, but all I am getting is an error, "unable to get 
setup.ini" from the different ftp addresses I have tried. I sent an 
email to the link at the bottom of the page, so hopefully they will be 
able to help me with that.

I am interested in whether or not there is some good reason for not 
using gcc3 anymore, but perhaps this is outside the bounds of this list.

I would also like to know why setup-x86.exe is configured to find and 
physically remove the gcc3 packages. It's like someone decided, "you're 
not allowed to have those anymore, so we are going to take them away". 
Since the compiler bin was already labeled gcc-3/g77-3, why would it 
have been a problem to leave the the bin files where they were? It 
doesn't appear as if they would have caused a problem. My make files 
were already configured to point to gcc-3 and not to whatever "which 
gcc" would return.

Someone always has to decide how these things will work, and I assume 
that is not easy in all instances. Still, I would expect there to be a 
very good reason why someone would go to the bother of trolling around 
in someone's file system and get rid of things that the user put there 
intentionally. If there isn't a compelling reason, I would find that 
rather odd and worth some discussion.

LMH


Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote:
> On 8/19/2013 3:13 PM, LMH wrote:
>> I would be happy to build gcc-3 myself, I'm just looking for some
>> documentation to get that done.
>
> I don't have a direct pointer for you but I'm sure you can find something
> while looking around the net.  gcc.gnu.org might be the best place to get
> some basic info about building gcc though.  Of course, there's no reason
> you can't just grab the old Cygwin source package and try to build it from
> there.  But unless that process intrigues you, I'd recommend skipping the
> extra effort and just installing the package from the "Cygwin Time
> Machine".
>
> <snip>
>
>> Was there some particular reason to physically remove the gcc-3 bin
>> from my
>> cygwin install? What would have been the harm in leaving it there,
>> since I
>> already had it installed? I think that many cygwin users would find it
>> useful to have the gcc3 packages included in the cygwin package manager,
>> even if they are in the obsolete section.
>
> The Cygwin package for gcc-3 is no longer supported.  gcc-3 hasn't been
> supported by the gcc folks for quite a while (I believe the last
> release by them was back in 2005).  Cygwin delivered it as a package
> for quite a while after that simply because 'setup.exe' required
> it to build.  But this has subsequently changed so support for it has
> since been dropped.  As I mentioned, there is a separate service that
> Peter Castro maintains called the "Cygwin Time Machine".  You can find
> older versions of Cygwin and its packages through this service.
> Everything available through that service is no longer supported by Cygwin
> or this list of course.
>
>> If the packages still exist and can be installed manually, I would
>> love to
>> know where to find the packages and documentation. If I have to build it
>> from src, that is fine to, but some documentation would really be helpful
>> there as well.
>
> Again, I'd recommend just pulling what you want from the "Cygwin Time
> Machine" if you just want the binary packages.  See:
>
> <http://www.fruitbat.org/Cygwin/index.html#cygwintimemachine>
>
> Of course, if you do want the sources, you can grab those from the same
> place.
>

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple