Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 10:17:34 -0400
Message-Id: <200106131417.KAA00710@envy.delorie.com>
X-Authentication-Warning: envy.delorie.com: dj set sender to dj AT envy DOT delorie DOT com using -f
From: DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <20010613073937.B25847@kendall.sfbr.org> (message from JT
	Williams on Wed, 13 Jun 2001 07:39:37 -0500)
Subject: Re: GCC-3.0 related problem with src/libc/stubs/stubXXXX.S
References: <200106130926 DOT f5D9QAX03971 AT hal DOT astr DOT lu DOT lv> <20010613073937 DOT B25847 AT kendall DOT sfbr DOT org>
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


> This thread (and others posted by Andris) lead me to wonder if
> djdev 2.04 should be built using gcc 2.95.3 and released ASAP,
> and djdev built with gcc 3.x be postponed for 2.05?

At this point, I would rather make gcc 3.0 the goal for 2.04.  We're
not near a release, so we have time to fix all the things that need
fixing.  If we don't fix them now, we'll just have to fix them later,
and users trying to build 2.04 in a year or so (when gcc 2.x is fully
deprecated) will have problems.

When it's our turn to do a release, we should try to support as many
compilers as is practical, with the latest release given the highest
priority.