X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Message-ID:	<48AF03F6.D19BBC3C@dessent.net>
Date:	Fri, 22 Aug 2008 11:22:46 -0700
From:	Brian Dessent <brian AT dessent DOT net>
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: Compiling gcc for cygwin
References:	<b609cb3b0808221100v329c65b9ldc0f0c716978a405 AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
X-IsSubscribed:	yes
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
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

NightStrike wrote:

> If cygwin ever wants to be able to support newer gcc compilers,
> something needs to be done in this area.  There are several options,

That's a quite a misleading statement to make.  Everything is fine for a
native 4.4 using 3.4 as the bootstrap compiler.  That's the whole point
of the three stage bootstrap, to eliminate any influence of the
bootstrap compiler on the final compiler.  The problem only occurs when
you build a 4.4 cross using 3.4 because by definition you can't
bootstrap a cross.  But even then you're fine if you first bootstrap a
recent native to use to build the cross.  It's really not the end of the
world.

Brian

--
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 -