Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.apps Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!ee.und.ac.za!hippo.ru.ac.za!kudu!g89r4222 From: g89r4222@kudu.ru.ac.za (Geoff Rehmet) Subject: Re: gcc-2.5? Message-ID: <g89r4222.751929043@kudu> Sender: news@hippo.ru.ac.za (Usenet News Admin) Organization: Rhodes University, Grahamstown, South Africa References: <2apjmh$8ub@news.ysu.edu> <2apvc3$dj7@pdq.coe.montana.edu> <2aqatk$e6e@pdq.coe.montana.edu> Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1993 21:10:43 GMT Lines: 30 In <2aqatk$e6e@pdq.coe.montana.edu> osyjm@cs.montana.edu (Jaye Mathisen) writes: >In article <2apvc3$dj7@pdq.coe.montana.edu>, >Nate Williams <nate@bsd.coe.montana.edu> wrote: >> >>However, this doesn't answer your question, but I would recommend against >>using gcc2.5.0a (especially for the kernel). >> >On the other hand, Nate thinks we should still be using gcc1, and at that, >I think gcc-1.39, so take this with a grain of salt. >I riffled through the ChangeLog stuff for 2.5.0a, and most of the 386 >specific changes were for some of the OSF stuff (osfrose, etc), and >a few Linux things, and some stuff that looked like plain old bug fixes, >as opposed to changes or enhancements. It doesn't look like there should >be much trouble, but I'm not a gcc internals expert either. >Try it. If it don't work, go back. If you have all the time in the world to compile and reinstall gcc as 2.5.1 and 2.5.2 .... 2.5.5 come out, by all means go ahead. As Nate said - I think it is best to wait for things to stabilise a bit. Geoff. -- ===========================csgr@alpha.ru.ac.za================================ Geoff Rehmet, Parallel Processing Group, | ____ _ o /\ Computer Science Department, | ___ _-\_<, /\/\/\ Rhodes University, RSA. | (*)/'(*) /\/\/\/\/\