Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 24 Dec 1995 10:56:04 -0800
From:      Josh MacDonald <jmacd@paris.CS.Berkeley.EDU>
To:        Chuck Robey <chuckr@glue.umd.edu>
Cc:        freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: gcc 2.7.1 
Message-ID:  <199512241856.KAA23126@paris.CS.Berkeley.EDU>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 24 Dec 1995 13:43:46 EST." <Pine.SUN.3.91.951224133924.1716B-100000@latte.eng.umd.edu> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On Sun, 24 Dec 1995, Josh MacDonald wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Surely as you suggest most people who are in need of the latest version
> > of a gcc or whatever can probably compile it themselves, but it 
> > takes a lot of time and effort to make sure its installed prpoperly
> > and working properly, especially to test the c++ installation because
> > you can't do the 2 or 3 stage build/compare with it.  It would be nice
> > to at least see a set of difss or a package for libg++ and recent versions
> > of gcc, this is my point.  I can contribute what I've done, but who knows
> > if I've done it right.  If there is one unified version, then everyone who
> > finds problems can contribute them and the GNU team will be better notified
> > of FreeBSD diffs.
> 
> Ahh!  Then you're asking for a port of gcc!  Now that is an idea I can 
> completely agree with, and it sounds like a wise thing to do.  It'll give 
> a lot of FreeBSD folks experience with it and it's various 
> bugs/enhancements.   I think it was Kaleb Keithley that I saw reporting 
> his experiences with 2.7.2.  Are you reading this, Kaleb?
> 
> Perhaps this should be moved to FreeBSD-ports?
> 

Yes.  That would be very nice.  Ummm, I still can't make shared libs work
though.  This would be a hard port to do in the normal ports fashion I
think.  I think the only three diffs I have for 2.7.1 right now are the
ASM_WEAKEN_LABEL removal, a change to gcc's stdarg.h so that __gnuc_va_list
agrees with libc, and gcc's stddef.h is all messed up.  It doesn't undefine
things like _BSD_SIZE_T_ leaves it defined but empty so that later stdlib.h
will produce something like 'typedef      size_t' and produce annoying 
warnings.  Perhaps it is better not to use those two files.

-josh
best to not use them.  I don't know.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199512241856.KAA23126>