Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 08:59:49 +0300 (WET) From: Andris Pavenis To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: dj AT delorie DOT com, djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: gcc 3.0 released In-Reply-To: <3405-Sat30Jun2001083323+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII 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 On Sat, 30 Jun 2001, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 15:07:31 -0400 > > From: DJ Delorie > > > > > That would mean that GCC 3.0 should have been released together with > > > Binutils, since that's the only way of updating the built-in script. > > > And likewise for the next releases of GCC and Binutils. > > > > If the script is written right, we shouldn't have to do this any more > > often than Linux or other systems do. > > That's true. However, note that, unlinke GNU/Linux, our port is much > less tested during development, and so more likely to suffer from > bitrot. We also release djdev much less frequently than glibc's > release cycle. For these two reasons, it's quite possible that we > will need to change the script when GNU/Linux doesn't. > > Anyway, did you check how frequently do the Linux people modify the > script? For all I know, they could be doing that every week or so ;-) > I don't think so. It is usually possible to use binutils versions in a rather large range. Of course one can go to http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/devel/binutils/ (binutils Linux versions from H.J.Lu) and see whether I'm right. I don't have time for that now Andris