DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject
	:references:in-reply-to:content-type; q=dns; s=default; b=C1BVQC
	ZrEKPct3qU1CZK7wVagqo22/1S9CnFK52uorVB+FQatZI+lIN8VfpuU/KSwcpQpa
	aZc0NytIkeLTnBvlEWJikJL1/pDO7M1XZwvGWPacoBOpTYA8HFgteDIOqZl5cjsl
	3ZN9RafMdr9NiTUBIulFRy6WedSRSjHTtW2WI=
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID: <5613A488.1040206@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2015 18:38:00 +0800
From: JonY <10walls AT gmail DOT com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:25.4) Gecko/20150524 FossaMail/25.1.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Updated: gcc-5.2.0-1 (Test x86/x86_64)
References: <announce DOT 560BC46D DOT 3060500 AT gmail DOT com> <5612C748 DOT 1070002 AT cornell DOT edu>
In-Reply-To: <5612C748.1070002@cornell.edu>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="iXKsrNLndXidJhfunoIxpMtwlD1QsHuOE"

--iXKsrNLndXidJhfunoIxpMtwlD1QsHuOE
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 10/6/2015 02:54, Ken Brown wrote:
> On 9/30/2015 7:15 AM, JonY wrote:
>>
>> gcc-5.2.0-1 has been uploaded for 32bit and 64bit Cygwin.
>>
>> This is the first series of the 5.x releases, and should be considered
>> as experimental as such.
>=20
> Just a HEADSUP for package maintainers who might want to try this: I
> installed this by clicking the Exp button in setup and choosing
> everything that seemed related to gcc.  This included binutils-2.25-2.
> It turns out that this test release is *not* related to the gcc-5
> release, and it has bugs that caused me problems.  So stick with
> binutils-2.25-1.
>=20
> [JonY, I can report the binutils-2.25-2 bug separately if you want
> details.  Briefly, I got errors when running 'nm -l' on some DLLs, on
> x86 only.]
>=20

Yes, I am aware that something weird is going on in the x86 binutils but
can't seem to pin it down anywhere. gcc builds hang when using the new
nm (or perhaps build very very slowly).

I'd be interested on your findings.


--iXKsrNLndXidJhfunoIxpMtwlD1QsHuOE
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=sfYS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--iXKsrNLndXidJhfunoIxpMtwlD1QsHuOE--