Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 13:03:56 +1030 (CST) From: Kris Kennaway <kkennawa@physics.adelaide.edu.au> To: Don Croyle <croyle@gelemna.ft-wayne.in.us> Cc: ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Preference between egcs and gcc28? Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.4.05.9902021302390.16776-100000@bragg> In-Reply-To: <863e4peg84.fsf@emerson.gelemna.ft-wayne.in.us>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 1 Feb 1999, Don Croyle wrote: > > egcs C++ binaries are not backwards compatible with those spat out by gcc 2.7, > > apparently. This bites you if you try and link against an egcs-built C++ > > library with gcc 2.7.x (e.g. the stock system compiler) - it seems to fail > > with a lot of unresolved symbols. > > This port doesn't create any libraries, so it's sufficient that eg++ > can link against the system libraries. That part seems to be working > so far. Yup, I haven't had any trouble doing this. > I'd gotten the impression that updating the system compiler was > something that was going to happen fairly early in 4.0's lifetime, so > I was really fishing for a hint as to which of the candidates > it would be so I could use it. Failing that, I'll go with egcs since > that seems to be what the author is using. Last I heard from TPTB, egcs was believed to be the way of the future for FreeBSD. Kris ----- (ASP) Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) announced today that the release of its productivity suite, Office 2000, will be delayed until the first quarter of 1901. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.OSF.4.05.9902021302390.16776-100000>