Re: update_excuses: -gcc
Anthony Towns writes:
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2003 at 08:45:46AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > # -gcc (2.95.2-20 to -)
> > * Maintainer: Debian GCC maintainers
> > * Boss says I shouldn't remove gcc
> > * Not considered
> > This is still in update_excuses, although the package is removed in
> > unstable.
>
> Yes, the exception is hardcoded:
>
> if src == "gcc":
> exc.addhtml("Boss says I shouldn't remove %s" % (src))
> okay = 0
>
> It's providing libg++2.8.1.3 and libstdc++2.10; libg++2.8.1.3-glibc2.2
> and libstdc++2.10-glibc2.2 is what everything in Debian uses now; those
> two libs are only useful for compatability with (reasonably old) third
> party C++ stuff.
>
> This shouldn't affect gcc maintentance *at all*, unless you want a gcc
> source package (instead of gcc-defaults/gcc-X.Y), or want to provide
> those libs.
There should be no third party packages depending on
libg++2.8.1.3. What is wrong with installing libstdc++2.10 from an
older debian release? OTOH there is no reason to remove it.
> ] stage1/xgcc -Bstage1/ -B/usr/m68k-linux/bin/ -DIN_GCC -O2 -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wtraditional -pedantic -Wno-long-long -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I../../src/gcc -I../../src/gcc/. -I../../src/gcc/config -I../../src/gcc/../include -c insn-recog.c \
> ] -o insn-recog.o
> ] insn-recog.c: In function `recog_7':
> ] insn-recog.c:9893: internal error: Illegal instruction
> ] Please submit a full bug report,
> ] with preprocessed source if appropriate.
>
> - Sun 13 Apr 2003 20:10: maybe-failed
> http://buildd.debian.org/fetch.php?&pkg=gcc-3.2&ver=1%3A3.2.3ds7-0pre8&arch=m68k&stamp=1050279027&file=log&as=raw
This one I see the first time. I'm reverting the two m68k patches
applied in the last upload for now.
> Do you guys know what you're doing about gcc 3.2 v gcc 3.3, or is
> everything still all confused about it?
>
> I don't really know gcc well enough to comment, but if it's what you
> need and want, I'm happy to say "focus on 3.3 for sarge", and work
> from there. Whatever happens, we do need to have a working toolchain
> for all architectures in testing and unstable (and stable of course)
> as continually as possible; if 3.3 is the best way of achieving that,
> that's great.
That's what IMO is the goal to strive for. The last gcc-snapshot
compiled fine on all architectures, so I uploaded 3.3 enabled for all
architectures. So my plan is:
- Wait until fixed 3.2 and 3.3 packages are in testing.
- Let the port maintainers decide, if they want 3.3 as the default
compiler (gpc will be the default on ia64 and hppa, but this is not
so important).
- Make 3.3 the default once it is released on all architectures,
unless the port maintainer wants to keep 3.2 as the default.
Matthias
Reply to: