X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org X-Yahoo-SMTP: Uu383n6swBCEN1G9up0WSnxbvN8fCPmk Message-ID: <4CD1BD94.6030208@cygwin.com> Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2010 15:52:52 -0400 From: "Larry Hall \(Cygwin\)" Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.1.21) Gecko/20090320 Remi/2.0.0.21-1.fc8.remi Lightning/0.9 Thunderbird/2.0.0.21 Mnenhy/0.7.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Is part of gcc3 missing? References: <21794C64742846718853014B087D0E6F AT cit DOT wayne DOT edu> <4CD178DE DOT 7010308 AT cygwin DOT com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com On 11/3/2010 3:25 PM, Andy Koppe wrote: > On 3 November 2010 14:59, Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote: >> On 11/3/2010 10:10 AM, Lee Maschmeyer wrote: >>> >>> Hmm. Is that really the best approach unless absolutely necessary? "That >>> doesn't work so do something else" has always struck me as a less than >>> ideal >>> approach to debugging. :-) Is it possible that caml could be repaired so >>> it >>> doesn't depend on GCC4? >> >> I'm not sure "repaired" is the right word for this > > I don't think it is. Gcc-4 is Cygwin 1.7's system compiler, so there's > nothing wrong with (parts of) the ocaml package depending on it. > > But I guess the ability to switch the default compiler back to gcc-3 > should come with a health warning: it may break stuff. Time to get rid > of the gcc alternatives setup perhaps, and require users to specify > gcc-3 explicitly if they still want it? I don't believe this is an issue with which compiler is used. The issue is simply that the OP is trying to build brltty with gcc-3 while not rebuilding (or using) dependencies (ocaml) built with gcc-3. I'd wager that just installing the old Cygwin ocaml packages that were built with gcc-3 would fix the problem, though like I said in my reply, I didn't actually test that theory. Of course, that's not a general recipe for success, since older packages built on gcc-3 may not always be available. So anyone that wants to build with gcc-3 must be prepared to build all dependencies. Like most software, the compiler is backward-compatible but isn't forward-compatible. But you're right. In a nutshell, if you don't consider and address these issues when using gcc-3 to rebuild packages, "it may break stuff". :-) -- Larry Hall http://www.rfk.com RFK Partners, Inc. (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office 216 Dalton Rd. (508) 893-9889 - FAX Holliston, MA 01746 _____________________________________________________________________ A: Yes. > Q: Are you sure? >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. >>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in email? -- 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