Mail Archives: djgpp-workers/2006/06/11/08:46:40
Hello.
decker AT dacafe DOT com wrote:
>> I think, that it's really a time simply to throw what we have at the
>> users and release it as 2.04. I'm afraid, that otherwise it will never
>> be done.
>
> Well, I'm not entirely sure of that either. But I am totally not up to
> speed on the real issues affecting (i.e preventing) a djgpp 2.04 release,
> and no one has (of yet) been specific enough to bring them up here, now.
> So I am somewhat confused.
A couple of years has elapsed since the 2.04 beta release, so everyone's
memory is probably a little fuzzy.
There are some pretty specific issues on the status page. ;)
http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~phekda/richdawe/djgpp/2.04/status204.html
A few of these are marked as show-stoppers.
> And what about the current release manager? The status webpage? Actually,
> I thought that DJ Delorie was at least "maintaining the website", so I am
> confused(concerned) why the current project staus has been relegated to
> the URL of someone who resigned publicly from the project over two years
> ago.
As far as I know, there is currently no release manager for DJGPP 2.04.
>> Of course also DJGPP v2.04 does not build with current GCC, so
>> one must use gcc-3.3.6 or maybe gcc-3.4.4. Current version is of course
>> not ideal, but I don't believe that we ever have better unless it will
>> be released.
>
> Now that sounds more serious. 'Of course' this would have to be fixed
> first before any kind of djgpp-elf based distro could be made available,
> as it is based on gcc 4.1.x. Strange that dborca has never mentioned such
> issues. I know that he already has a libc.so, and that djgpp-elf is
> currently gcc 4.x based. Hmmmm....
It seems to me there are two ways to get 2.04 out there:
(1) Release 2.04 as-is.
I wonder how many people are still using 2.03. If everyone is using 2.04
then it has in effect been "released" already.
(2) Someone volunteers to be the release manager. This release manager
gets 2.04 to build with the latest gcc. He/she decides whether any of
the existing know bugs are show-stoppers. He/she rebuilds the whole
toolchain with latest gcc + new build of 2.04.
Andrew Cottrell did a bunch of work to automate rebuilding the whole
toolchain. I think I have his scripts on a CD or DVD somewhere.
I estimate option 2 will require a day a week of someone's time for two
to three months -- maybe more. 50% of this time will be "unproductive"
in the sense of dealing with mail, getting information on issues,
rebuilding things.
Any volunteers?
Bye, Rich =]
--
Richard Dawe [ http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~phekda/richdawe/ ]
"You can't evaluate a man by logic alone."
-- McCoy, "I, Mudd", Star Trek
- Raw text -