Re: Top 5 things that aren't in Debian but should be :-)
On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 01:12:23PM +1030, Dan Shearer wrote:
> > Steve Kemp's gcc has been working well for me. I've built kernels and
> > applications with it and not found any problems. I expect that it will
> > become a standard feature in Debian's gcc soon.
>
> What makes you so confident about this? I agree that Steve's GCC
> (packaging some work from IBM research, see http://www.steve.org.uk)
> seems to work but there's a long jump between that and saying it is
> ready to unleash on everyone. I've not heard any reports from embedded
> users for example and I've never asked gdb developers what they think of
> it either -- just to pick two examples of possible problems that occur
> to me on the spot. Maybe someone has done lots of homework on this, the
> IBM people perhaps.
When I put it together I expected three problem packages for x86:
The kernel, xfree86, and gcc itself. The only one that I've not been
able to test yet is xfree86. (Although I've no idea what other people
are using this for I've only received a couple of minor bug reports).
Given the lack of breakage so far I think the sensible thing is to
wait for a while then enable this for x86 gcc's. I'd imagine this is
the plan anyway as the facility for enabling it is already available.
(Why include the patch if there's no intention of it ever being used?)
I can see that the GCC team might wish to wait for it to be
incorporated upstream but I'd imagine that would need all platforms to
be working properly and tested. I'd be inclined to enable it if it
were my decision, default to off sure but available to all users for
testing.
Steve
--
# Debian Security Audit Project
http://www.steve.org.uk/Debian/
Reply to: