From mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Wed Jan 23 08:25:43 2008 X-Original-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de Delivered-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 18:03:30 -0500 (EST) From: Keith Scroggins To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Vincent_Rivi=E8re?= Cc: mint Subject: Re: [MiNT] GCC 4.2.2 - Keith's Latest Progress (or lack thereof) In-Reply-To: <479670A1.90801@freesbee.fr> Message-ID: References: <478A8F44.3030702@freesbee.fr> <47936072.4050702@freesbee.fr> <4793D6BA.9030806@freesbee.fr> <479656E6.1000206@freesbee.fr> <479670A1.90801@freesbee.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Errors-To: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi X-original-sender: kws@radix.net Precedence: bulk List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-Id: X-List-ID: List-subscribe: List-owner: List-post: 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=BAYES_00 X-Spam-Level: Hello Vincent, > Share it ! > If the binaries are available, a lot of more people will try the new GCC, > they will fix the sources of their programs for it, they will find more bugs, > we will fix them, and we will have a better compiler for making better > software ! > > The best form for binary distribution (even for testing) would be a RPM > package. However I don't know (yet) how to build them. I *could* try to build an RPM, especially since I already have a native source tree all built and sitting on my Falcon, I would have to do a lot of cheating, but its better than letting RPM run for 24+ hours going thru the whole process again. I was actually looking at trying to build a Binutils RPM just before I got this email. I guess I might still try to do that. Just have to make sure I have the current patches. The big question is do I create an RPM that just goes ahead and replaces the installed GCC 2.95? I am building ScummVM natively (to see if the thunk problems still exist with GCC 4.2.2, already had one wierd issue with configure, their custom configure did not like the cross compiled g++ (doing g++ -dumpversion, reported bad version when looking for 2.95 or > up to 4.9.9) but liked the native compiled one, really wierd, but thats something I'll look into more later. I might start with binutils tonight when it completes. As far as I can tell, RPMs basically have to be built on the machine natively, I have seen it said that they can be cross compiled, but never found any good documentation on how to do it. Keith