Mail Archives: cygwin/2001/10/21/21:49:33
>
> On Sun, Oct 21, 2001 at 09:29:36PM -0400, Piyush Kumar wrote:
> >Have u already built the pre-release! Or has someone else? If yes, is
> >there some directions on what needs to be done! Where should I goto to
> >look at this kind of stuff in the future. Any ideas!
>
> I have no plans on building gcc 3.0.2, currently. I'm the gcc maintainer,
> although I have asked a few times for volunteers to take this over.
>
Maybe someday I'm good enough to take over this! For now I'm struggling
to just use the snapshots :)
> >I didnt find any one talking about the GCC 3.0.2 pre-release in the
> >cygwin mailing list, so asked it in the gcc mailing list. I will post
> >my questions to the cygwin mailing list from now on.
>
> It's a safe bet that I will never go to the effort of building a *pre*
> release. That would just be a lot of work for no real gain. If/when
> gcc 3.x becomes the official cygwin release, I'll probably base it
> on an official gcc release.
>
If u released a gcc that didnt work well on Cygwin, I'm sure
I would be one of the first people to complain ;)
> Ok. I have a reason. The reason is that it is cruicial that we have a
> known stable/good version of gcc for our applications. Releasing a
> version of gcc with code generation bugs would be catastrophic. There
> is a higher probability that a real gcc release would be stable than
> some random prelease or CVS release.
Now that I started compiling stuff myself, after waiting for so long for
gcc 3.0.1 on the mirror sites...I realize that its not a bad idea to wait
a bit more and get something that works. :)
--Piyush
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -