Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 22:37:46 +0930 (CST) From: Greg Lewis <glewis@trc.adelaide.edu.au> To: Greg Quinlan <greg@swlct.sthames.nhs.uk> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: GNU gcc 2.95.1 Message-ID: <199908261307.WAA40190@ares.maths.adelaide.edu.au> In-Reply-To: <010401beefb6$3fcc6a00$5214010a@qmpgmc.ac.uk> from Greg Quinlan at "Aug 26, 1999 12:29:24 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> How far behind is 2.7.2.3 from 2.95.1? Quite a ways. Especially in terms of languages other than C, e.g. I wouldn't use g++ 2.7.2.3 for C++ development, but YMMV. Note that 2.95.1 can be traced directly to the egcs development rather than what was previously the core gcc development (I believe gcc 2.95 is what would have been egcs 1.2). > Is 2.95.1 considered an unknown qauntity/ quality? The main issue is that the 3.x kernel will not compile correctly with egcs/gcc-2.95. It will compile, just not correctly :). The relevant kernel code has been fixed in the 4.0-CURRENT branch but I don't know of any plans to backport the changes to -STABLE. I've used egcs for C++ development for quite some time and am very pleased with it overall. -- Greg Lewis glewis@trc.adelaide.edu.au Computing Officer +61 8 8303 5083 Teletraffic Research Centre To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199908261307.WAA40190>