X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
X-ORBL:	[69.110.162.137]
Message-ID:	<43E2CABA.4010504@myrealbox.com>
Date:	Thu, 02 Feb 2006 19:15:06 -0800
From:	Tim Prince <tprince AT myrealbox DOT com>
Reply-To:	tprince AT computer DOT org
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050921
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	djh <henman AT it DOT to-be DOT co DOT jp>
CC:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: GCC compiler
References:	<43E2BB27 DOT 7050407 AT it DOT to-be DOT co DOT jp>
In-Reply-To:	<43E2BB27.7050407@it.to-be.co.jp>
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

djh wrote:
> 
> My current version of gcc that setup.exe downloaded for me is:
> 
> gcc (GCC) 3.4.4 (cygming special) (gdc 0.12, using dmd 0.125)
> 
> The other day I downloaded gcc 4.0.2
>   filename:  gcc-4.0.2.tar.bz2
> 
> did a configure, make, and makeinstall
> 
> and the build was successfull.  I compiled a program with it and it 
> seems to work. 
> My question is, am I fooling myself?
> Was there a lot of tweaking involved in getting the setup.exe downloaded 
> version of gcc to work with cygwin?
You could run make -k check and compare your results with those posted 
by others at gcc-testsuite.  This would show how well the standard 
tested functions of gcc itself are working.  If you don't care to use 
additional features of the cygming special, such as -mno-cygwin, you may 
be set up to do what matters to you.

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -