[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: RFD : libg++/gcc/egcs upgrades needed for libc6 (READ ME)



Marcus Brinkmann <Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de> writes:

> On Sun, Feb 22, 1998 at 03:28:43PM -0700, Galen Hazelwood wrote:

> We will come to a point, where gcc 2.7.2 will not be able to compile all
> packages (C++ comes to mind. Only recently gcc 2.7 was able to compile
> libgtkmm, because of substantial changes in libgtkmm. Others may follow).

> I don't know when this will be. Hopefully gcc 2.8 will then be usable.

I think quite a lot of packages will break for some reason or
another when switching compilers. My experiences with egcs shows that
the difference in warnings and errors the compiler gives breaks
several packages.

> Is it a bug in the standard compiler if a package can't be compiled or a bug
> in the package? If a package can be compiled with egcs (and it follows the
> standard of that language), but can't be compiled with gcc, what is to fix?

If it compiles without any warnings and warnings enabled under egcs I
think it will (maybe with some warnings) compile under gcc as well. If 
something gives a warning under egcs and an error under gcc (or other
way) its a fault of the package and not the compiler. If it compiles
without warnings on gcc but fails on egcs, then one should recompile
with warnings on under gcc and see if they are the once that fail on
egcs (or otherway around).

Packages shouldn't depend on a specific compiler, because that
decreases portability. The sooner we start to use different compilers
the sooner we will find those problems.

May the Source be with you.
			Mrvn


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .


Reply to: