RE: Freeze Goals -- WAS: September release
David Starner writes:
> At 01:31 PM 7/15/99 -0700, Brent Fulgham wrote:
> >> > gcc 2.95
> >Can anyone comment on how gcc2.95 compares to our current egcs?
> >I know gcc2.95 is based on a fork from nov/dec 1998, and they haven't
> >fully implemented all of the egcs features.
> No. GCC 2.95 is EGCS 1.2, it's just that it's now the official GNU GCC
> compiler. It's completely up to date on the EGCS side, but it's still
> missing some of the latest work on the old official GCC in CVS.
- egcs-1.2 is gcc-2.95.
- egcs-1.1.x is based on on a code branch from August 1998.
- gcc-2.95 includes gcc-2.8.1 and all changes made up to September
- inclusion off all missing gcc-2.8.x code is planned for 2.96 (or
3.0, don't know exactly).
> >That could have an impact on our g++-compiled packages, because
> >apparently gcc2.95 is not binary-compatible with egcs-1.1 libraries.
> Theoritacally, no, it's not. In practice (if I understand correctly), it's
> usually compatable as long as STL stuff isn't used.
gcc-2.95 uses new library version numbers for libstdc++
(2.10). valarray support is added in this version.
You can test the gcc-2.95 packages in the project/experimental
distribution. gcc-2.95 will be uploaded as sonn as possible; the code
is almost frozen.
- g++ is more conformant (and more restrictive) to the standard.
- much better support for alpha (and powerpc?). Compiles now packages
that could'nt compiled before.
- More aggressive optimization (however kernel must be compiled with