X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Message-ID: <4A427AEF.8030805@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 20:13:51 +0100
From: Dave Korn <dave DOT korn DOT cygwin AT googlemail DOT com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: gcc-4 is broken on both cygwin-1.5 and cygwin-1.7
References: <320e992a0906241109x199f213dw153feca72fb6de28 AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
In-Reply-To: <320e992a0906241109x199f213dw153feca72fb6de28@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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

Eray Ozkural wrote:
> It cost me a lot of time but I verified that gcc-4 is malfunctioning
> on both versions.

  It is possible you have actually verified what you think you have verified,
but you give no details so it's impossible to evaluate your methodology.

> It's impossible to build boost-1.38 or build-1.39, even if you build
> only static libs.

  So.. what?  Error message?  Computer blows up?  Hippos attack?  What *happens*?

> I had to use the gcc 4 that I had built myself previously on cygwin-1.5
> 
> And I think boost is pretty essential.
> 
> Did you patch gcc-4 or something? 

  There are numerous patches to GCC-4.  They all fixed bugs or added required
enhancements, and I spent a great deal of time running regression tests before
and after applying each patch and didn't observe any testsuite failures.
There is a known non-conformance problem with the shared libstdc++ DLL (can't
interpose replaced operator new/delete) which I'm currently working to fix.
Static linking should be fully functional though.

> Whatever it is, I would like an
> unpatched version if possible, as a C++ user. Could you make an
> alternative package please?

  Anyone is free to compile anything they like, but I'm certainly not going to
go to that much trouble on the basis of an angry rant with zero information in it.

> It must be that auto-import thingie that's FUBAR'd.

  Your diagnosis appears to be evidence-free guesswork.

> At any rate, C++/boost users attention: don't use cygwin's own gcc-4
> package, it's badly broken.

  You really haven't explained or analysed the problem in any detail.  The
most likely explanation is that GCC is fine and you've run into a binutils
problem, but without any details from you of what exactly you think is broken
it's not exactly easy to proceed.

  Come on.  If you want assistance, please write a proper bug report.  With
information, and details, and all that useful stuff.  Then we can make it *work*.

    cheers,
      Davek



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