From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Jun 20 09:40:17 1995 Return-Path: hackers-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id JAA28150 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 20 Jun 1995 09:40:17 -0700 Received: from lirmm.lirmm.fr (lirmm.lirmm.fr [193.49.104.10]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id JAA28138 for ; Tue, 20 Jun 1995 09:40:14 -0700 Received: from lirmm.fr (baobab.lirmm.fr [193.49.106.14]) by lirmm.lirmm.fr (8.6.10/8.6.4) with ESMTP id SAA16386 for ; Tue, 20 Jun 1995 18:39:38 +0200 Message-Id: <199506201639.SAA16386@lirmm.lirmm.fr> To: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: gcc 2.7.0 Date: Tue, 20 Jun 1995 18:39:35 +0200 From: "Philippe Charnier" Sender: hackers-owner@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk Hello, JustFYI: I compiled 2.7.0 (i386--freebsd) and didn't see problem during this stage, then I made a new kernel using this compiler and only found warnings (comparison between signed and unsigned) many times. When trying to make a C++ project, I got an error from the assembler, something like ``unknown pseudo instruction: .weak''. According to some people, I think that 2.7.0 should be part of FreeBSD as soon as possible, so that specific changes could be incorporated in the next gcc release. Maybe an intermediate stage in the port area would be nice for fixing some parts of the tree (e.g. because of the new ``for'' semantic) without breaking current. Have a nice day. -------- -------- Philippe Charnier charnier@lirmm.fr LIRMM, 161 rue Ada, 34392 Montpellier cedex 5 -- France ------------------------------------------------------------------------