GCC 4.9.3 "experimental"?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

GCC 4.9.3 "experimental"?

Eli Zaretskii
Can someone please tell what prevents GCC-4.9.3-preview build to
become the official latest build of MinGW GCC?  Is something missing
from the tarballs I see on the download site?  Are the binaries
somehow less safe than the latest "official" ones?

Thanks.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
MinGW-users mailing list
[hidden email]

This list observes the Etiquette found at
http://www.mingw.org/Mailing_Lists.
We ask that you be polite and do the same.  Disregard for the list etiquette may cause your account to be moderated.

_______________________________________________
You may change your MinGW Account Options or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-users
Also: mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: GCC 4.9.3 "experimental"?

Keith Marshall-3
On 14/12/15 17:27, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> Can someone please tell what prevents GCC-4.9.3-preview build to
> become the official latest build of MinGW GCC?

I cross-compiled both that, and the earlier GCC-4.8.5-preview, as
crossed-native packages, on my Linux-Mint Debian host. I posted them,
and invited comment from the community, regarding their suitability for
formal release; to date, I've had absolutely no feedback whatsoever in
this regard, (beyond this enquiry itself).

> Is something missing from the tarballs I see on the download site?

IIRC, they are lacking OpenMP support entirely, and I had difficulty in
building with Ada support, (although I was able to eventually attain the
latter, but, since my knowledge of Ada is completely non-existent, I
would have no idea where to begin testing it).

> Are the binaries somehow less safe than the latest "official" ones?

I don't know.  The GCC-4.9.3 cross-compiler I used to build them works
absolutely fine for me, in production.  However, I no longer have any
use for Windows, in any shape or form as a production platform, so until
the community offer some feedback, they will remain untested.

--
Regards,
Keith.

Public key available from keys.gnupg.net
Key fingerprint: C19E C018 1547 DE50 E1D4 8F53 C0AD 36C6 347E 5A3F


------------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
MinGW-users mailing list
[hidden email]

This list observes the Etiquette found at
http://www.mingw.org/Mailing_Lists.
We ask that you be polite and do the same.  Disregard for the list etiquette may cause your account to be moderated.

_______________________________________________
You may change your MinGW Account Options or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-users
Also: mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe

signature.asc (853 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: GCC 4.9.3 "experimental"?

Eli Zaretskii
> From: Keith Marshall <[hidden email]>
> Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2015 22:41:21 +0000
>
> On 14/12/15 17:27, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Can someone please tell what prevents GCC-4.9.3-preview build to
> > become the official latest build of MinGW GCC?
>
> I cross-compiled both that, and the earlier GCC-4.8.5-preview, as
> crossed-native packages, on my Linux-Mint Debian host. I posted them,
> and invited comment from the community, regarding their suitability for
> formal release; to date, I've had absolutely no feedback whatsoever in
> this regard, (beyond this enquiry itself).

Sorry, I must have missed the announcement, or maybe forgot about it.
I only remember announcements about the 4.8.4 preview.

> > Are the binaries somehow less safe than the latest "official" ones?
>
> I don't know.  The GCC-4.9.3 cross-compiler I used to build them works
> absolutely fine for me, in production.  However, I no longer have any
> use for Windows, in any shape or form as a production platform, so until
> the community offer some feedback, they will remain untested.

OK, I installed the files on one of my development machines, and will
provide feedback in a couple of weeks.  For now, I can say I've
compiled wget and Emacs with this version, and the results look very
good.

Thanks.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
MinGW-users mailing list
[hidden email]

This list observes the Etiquette found at
http://www.mingw.org/Mailing_Lists.
We ask that you be polite and do the same.  Disregard for the list etiquette may cause your account to be moderated.

_______________________________________________
You may change your MinGW Account Options or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-users
Also: mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe