Weekly MacOS X binaries for gfortran!

[Andrew Pinski]

On Dec 23, 2004, at 9:35 AM, coudert@lcp.u-psud.fr wrote:

>> Yes by reverting two (or is it three) patches by that means you
>> don'tget some of the goodies associated with the updated cctools and
>> GCC.  Like
>> "dead" function stripping (which is what . subsections_via_symbols is
>> used for) and you don't have to use -force_cpusubtype_ALL when you are
>> compiling code which uses some optional instructions.
>
> OK. Would there be any interest in making these optionnal in the GCC
> sources (since configure already detects if the machine has an updated
> version of cctools to issue the error message in that case) so that
> everybody is satisfied. I don't know much about GCC development 
> policies,
> but I think having a source tree that doesn't build cleanly on an
> "up-to-date" ¹ box is an annoyance.

Not really as I did not mention that you cannot use C++ without a new
cctools anyways.

-- Pinski