From mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Tue Aug 9 01:54:18 2005 X-Original-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de Delivered-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de Subject: Re: [MiNT] MiNT/GCC Obsevation From: Mark Duckworth To: Andreas Schwab Cc: Mint List In-Reply-To: References: <1123540263.11037.8.camel@mduckworth.phillypark.net> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2005 19:50:37 -0400 Message-Id: <1123545037.11037.10.camel@mduckworth.phillypark.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 (2.2.3-2.1.fc4.nr) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Errors-To: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi X-original-sender: mduckworth@atari-source.com Precedence: bulk List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-Id: X-List-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at relay.boerde.de X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on relay.boerde.de X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.0 tagged_above=-50.5 required=7.0 tests=AWL, BAYES_00 X-Spam-Level: On Tue, 2005-08-09 at 01:46 +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote: > Mark Duckworth writes: > > > I just checked out the Debian 68k list archive and it looks like they > > are still on gcc 2.95.4. But I didn't know there was a gcc 2.95.4.... > > There never was a 2.95.4 release. But there has been a few fixes checked > into the 2.95 CVS branch before it was closed (including the usual change > to the version number). > > > hrmm.. This could be indicative of serious issues with m68k code > > generation in gcc 3.x+?? (maybe only g++ problem). > > AFAICT gcc 4.0.x appears to be in a fairly good shape on m68k. > > Andreas. Keith pointed out to me that m68k is an official target on every gcc up until now. So I guess it should work ;) Thanks, Mark