X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Message-ID: <55676DC1.8040104@iki.fi>
Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 22:34:25 +0300
From: "Andris Pavenis (andris DOT pavenis AT iki DOT fi)" <djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: DJGPP v2.05: some thoughts
References: <55673F0B DOT 1090103 AT iki DOT fi>
In-Reply-To: <55673F0B.1090103@iki.fi>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

On 05/28/2015 07:15 PM, Andris Pavenis (andris DOT pavenis AT iki DOT fi) wrote:
> I think it would be best to get DJGPP v2.05 actual release out soon enough. It would not be nice 
> to repeat what happened with v2.04 again.
>
> Some questions that should be answered for that:
> - what critical problems we have what should be fixed for release
> - what we want in and what can wait
>
> Making release would include also moving out current stuff from pub/djgpp/current (one should be 
> careful with source packages) and moving files from pub/djgpp/beta to current (possibly not all) 
> and other related changes.
>
> There is danger of repeating history with v2.04 if begin to add too much new stuff or new changes.
>
> One possible new feature that comes into mind :
> - changes for more full support of wide characters have been around for a long time. We must 
> decide whether we want to get it in v2.05 or we should wait after release.
>
I agree with Eli, that it is better to postpone integration of wchar support after relerase of v2.05

> One of critical problems which as I think should be fixed if possible:
> - problems with DXE built with gcc-5.1.0 (I only tested 4.7.3 which is OK and 5.1.0).
>
This appears to be not a DJGPP v2.05 beta problem.

Demo works OK when binutils-2.24 is being used, but fails with binutils-2.25. I initially used to 
two different DJGPP installations (one had gcc-5.1.0, another one gcc-4.7.3) and suspected that the 
problem is with newer GCC. Having different binutils version did not come into mind.

Andris