From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 22 22:25:17 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B8EF16A41C for ; Wed, 22 Jun 2005 22:25:17 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from sean@mcneil.com) Received: from mail.mcneil.com (mcneil.com [24.199.45.54]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6ED9843D49 for ; Wed, 22 Jun 2005 22:25:17 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from sean@mcneil.com) Received: from localhost (localhost.mcneil.com [127.0.0.1]) by mail.mcneil.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19EBBF1C53; Wed, 22 Jun 2005 15:25:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.mcneil.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (server.mcneil.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 55995-07; Wed, 22 Jun 2005 15:25:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mcneil.com (mcneil.com [24.199.45.54]) by mail.mcneil.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DDB0F1BFA; Wed, 22 Jun 2005 15:25:08 -0700 (PDT) From: Sean McNeil To: Kris Kennaway In-Reply-To: <20050622221942.GA36733@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <42B409A7.5020909@mail.uni-mainz.de> <42B417C7.80904@samsco.org> <20050619043539.GA46516@dragon.NUXI.org> <20050622221942.GA36733@xor.obsecurity.org> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Sean McNeil Consulting, Inc Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 15:25:08 -0700 Message-Id: <1119479108.2709.3.camel@server.mcneil.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 FreeBSD GNOME Team Port Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at mcneil.com Cc: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 6.0-Current and gcc 4.x X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: sean@mcneil.com List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 22:25:17 -0000 On Wed, 2005-06-22 at 18:19 -0400, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Sat, Jun 18, 2005 at 09:35:39PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 18, 2005 at 06:47:03AM -0600, Scott Long wrote: > > > Given all the disruptions in the past 3 years over gcc > > > 3.x, I think it would be nice to take a small break and not be on the > > > bleeding edge of gcc. > > > > I think you're grossly over exagerating the "disruptions" over GCC 3.x. > > The ABI breakage at numerous points early in the GCC 3.x branch was > extremely disruptive. This is the amd64 mailing list, so I assume you are talking about amd64 machines and I thought the architecture wasn't really supported before GCC 3.x. In any event, I doubt there would be any such disruption between 3.x and 4.x. The amd64 ABI is pretty solid now, correct? Cheers, Sean