This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: gcc build status page
- To: "Bobby Krupczak" <rdk at empire dot com>,"Alexandre Oliva" <aoliva at cygnus dot com>
- Subject: Re: gcc build status page
- From: "Tim Prince" <tprince at computer dot org>
- Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2000 14:33:16 -0700
- Cc: "Bobby Krupczak" <rdk at empire dot com>,<gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- References: <200004102047.QAA20465@polynesian.empire.com>
If you don't have evidence that someone else has done it for your target,
you should run 'make check' and a representative sample of your own software
in order to have some confidence. Even then, you should stick with the
options which have been exercised in testsuite. My opinion.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bobby Krupczak" <rdk@empire.com>
To: "Alexandre Oliva" <aoliva@cygnus.com>
Cc: "Bobby Krupczak" <rdk@empire.com>; <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
Sent: Monday, April 10, 2000 1:47 PM
Subject: Re: gcc build status page
> Hi!
>
> >But have you been using it intensively? C++ too?
>
> The tone of the question frightens me. Should I be using an earlier
> version of gcc on Solaris 8? Im not using c++. What gotchas should I
> be concerned about?
>
> >Many people have got GCC 2.95.2 ``working'' on DU 5 and HP/UX 11 too,
> >but only because they haven't seen the problems yet.
> >
> >> The Sun freeware guys are also distributing it pre-built on their
> >> web site.
> >
> >This doesn't mean much either. There are pre-compiled distributions
> >of GCC 2.95.2 for HP/UX 11 that just won't work. Probably for DU 5
> >too.
>
> Yikes! Thanks for the warning. Do you guys have a preferred release
> that I should be using for Solaris 8 32-bit?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bobby