This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: 3.4 PATCH: Support Solaris 10
- From: Bruce Korb <bkorb at veritas dot com>
- To: Rainer Orth <ro at TechFak dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Bruce Korb <bkorb at gnu dot org>, java-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Hans Boehm <hans_boehm at hp dot com>, libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 10:14:23 -0700
- Subject: Re: 3.4 PATCH: Support Solaris 10
- Organization: Home
- References: <16243.7325.90258.143107@xayide.TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE>
Rainer Orth wrote:
>
> The next version of Solaris will be identified as *-*-solaris2.10. Of
> course it needs to be treated very much like Solaris 8/9, not (by matching
> wildcards) like Solaris 2.1 :-)
Alternatively, we could treat Solaris 2.1 systems as if they were 2.10. :-D
> The following straightforward patch does this by handling it like Solaris
> 8/9 where appropriate and removing Solaris version wildcards except where
> micro releases existed. Up to date, this holds only for Solaris 2.5/2.5.1,
> which is treated appropriately. By being careful about wildcard use, we
> avoid problems with Solaris 20 etc. in the future :-)
I think Solaris 2.2 will be deemed obsolete before we get to 2.20.
We'll have to solve the UNIX Y2K problem before we see that issue come up.
> Bootstrapped with only a single regression compared to a
> sparc-sun-solaris2.8 on sparc-sun-solaris2.10.
>
> +FAIL: g++.old-deja/g++.eh/badalloc1.C execution test
>
> I'm not yet sure what's going on here, but this should nevertheless be good
> enough for now.
Particularly since you're working with a beta release.
> Ok for mainline?
Looks fine to me. I think GCC 3.3 may still be alive by the time
Sol 2.10 is released, so you might consider that branch, too.