[haiku-development] Re: Questions about possible GCC update
- From: "Alexander von Gluck IV" <kallisti5@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 15:56:35 +0000
May 4, 2018 8:26 AM, "miqlas" <miqlas@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
2018-05-04 13:50 GMT+02:00 Adrien Destugues <pulkomandy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
So i just updated the GCC7.1.0 recipe to 7.3.0, builds and packages just
fine, but i haven't did
much testing. It was able to compile some small projects and the resulting
binaries working ok. I
know, this testing is not enough for changing a significant part like GCC,
it should be able to
build Haiku too, etc.
- Do we want to switch to newer GCC before Beta?
Only if it doesn't break things.
Makes sense :)
+1.
I'd personally like to see at *least* 7.3 for R1B1 on the x86_64 release.
Fedora 28 just released with 8.0.1. 5.4.x is in the rear-view mirror.
I did some work on taking our existing gcc patches and rebasing them on 7.3
with hopes of getting them upstream'ed... it *almost* builds but I ran out of
gas on the task.
https://github.com/kallisti5/buildtools/tree/gcc-73
Feel free to use anything in that branch that might apply. (but it sounds like
you got further than me :-))
As a first step I would suggest naming the new package gcc7 (or gcc8)
instead of
just gcc. This way by default people still get gcc5 (and we still build
Haiku with it),
but we can start experimenting with newer versions?
The GCC recipes already following this naming scheme. No changes required.
- Should we stay with the 5.x branch can we switch to the 7.x/8.x branch?
I still don't get the new gcc versionning scheme. So, I don't know. Did they
break the ABI?
I fear i can't answer this question. Somebody else?
Naming the packages gcc7/8 and porting the following tool sounds like a winning
strategy
going forward:
http://abicheck.sourceforge.net
-- Alex
Other related posts:
