Message-Id: Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Salvador Eduardo Tropea (SET)" Organization: INTI To: Robert Hoehne , djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 10:10:54 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: gcc 2.8.0 In-reply-to: <34C3CFFE.F72F7C7@gmx.net> Precedence: bulk Robert wrote: Here are some opinions > I have done now a gcc 2.8.0 port for DJGPP after making > some minor patches. > It is at least stable enough to recompile gcc 2.8.0 > with itself and some test programs. > (BTW: the hardest part was to build ligcc.a, but > after some tricks it worked now). > > I have also already a first gcc280s.zip (about 5.2 MB) > (in the common distribution format) and making the bin > zip wouldn't be so hard. > > My questions are now the following: > > - Is there some interest for it? :-) Yes, I'm interested. > - Should we test the port first before makeing a > public release? (I would prefer it) Of course, we must be sure that it's less buggy than 2.7.2, and .0 versions are normally more buggy. > - Where to upload it for testing? (I would prefer a > similar solution like the v2/.alphas directory) I like it too. > - Is it OK, to have the binaries configured (which > needs mostly changes to djgpp.env) to search the > executables in a more unix-like way in > > %DJDIR%/lib/gcc-lib/i386-pc-msdosdjgpp/2.80/ > > (by setting GCC_EXEC_PREFIX) > > This would help also to have more than one gcc installed > without conflicting them. > > I would prefer this technique, but how to include the changes > for djggp.env in the gcc280b.zip? In the readme? Knowing > that there are people which cannot read them? > > - Should the stabs debugging format be the default? (Which > I would prefer). The only problems I see here are > > * GDB 4.16 cannot use exe's with mixed debugging information > (the next version has not this bug) > > * FSDB and edebug32 cannot read the stabs debugging information > > * symify cannot be used, but for this I have written already > a program "gsymify" (the name can be changed of course) which > is based on the BFD library an can read both debugging information > formats. I think that making stabs as default isn't a good idea by now. But the people that uses GDB, FSDB and edebug (and not RHIDE) can easily understand that they must just add a switch in the compilation. > - Should the binaries be built with the DJGPP alpha release > or with the original 2.01 version? I think that 2.01 is more stable, but perhaps alpha+free patched is better. I think that for the test version the alpha is better because is a double test. SET ------------------------------------ 0 -------------------------------- Visit my home page: http://set-soft.home.ml.org/ or http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Vista/6552/ Salvador Eduardo Tropea (SET). (Electronics Engineer) Alternative e-mail: set-sot AT usa DOT net - ICQ: 2951574 Address: Curapaligue 2124, Caseros, 3 de Febrero Buenos Aires, (1678), ARGENTINA TE: +(541) 759 0013