This is the mail archive of the cygwin mailing list for the Cygwin project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

RE: [ANNOUNCEMENT] New experimental package: gcc4-4.3.0-1


Yaakov (Cygwin Ports) wrote on 11 September 2008 12:18:

>>   libgmp3, libmpfr1 - These may become statically linked in a future
>> version.
> 
> Why bother?

  Hence the "may".  I don't plan to bother for myself, but it depends if I
start getting loads of ".... gcc doesn't seem to do anything and $? is 53 ..."
bug reports.

>>   ./gcc4-4.3.0-1-cygport.local gcc4-4.3.0-1 all
>>       unfortunately I've used a forked cygport script while
>>          testing this.  the stable release will rely only
>> 	 on the official cygport release.
> 
> Are there any patches that you still need in cygport for gcc4?

  :)  If so, I will submit upstream.  Actually I think I can probably do it
all with the hooks and overrides, but I haven't got up-to-date with the
prep_gnu_info changes yet ...

> 
>>   ./gcc4-java-4.3.0-1.tar.bz2
> 
> This seems to be incomplete; just gcj, no gij or libgcj.

  That's all I get from a default build, I'm not sure if --disable-libjava is
the upstream default right now but knowing the somewhat sorry state of libjava
on cygwin I wouldn't be surprised.  (I'll give it a go and if anything manages
to compile, I'll ship it.)

> 
>>   ./gcc4-runtime-4.3.0-1.tar.bz2
> 
> In debian, this package is called libgcc1 for most arches.  I would
> suggest a similar naming, but I see the DLL isn't versioned; why not?

  Because I didn't use libtool to do it.  I think Aaron's patch to build
libgcc shared from upstream does it properly, so I'll be adopting it if I can,
otherwise I'll just crudely bodge it in.

 
>>  - Shared libgcc
>>       (selectable by --shared-libgcc/--static-libgcc flag)
> 
> What's the story with shared libgfortran3/libobjc2/libstdc++6?

  Didn't look at fortran and objc.

  The problem with making shared libstdc - it can be done - is that it shows
regressions, because win32 doesn't currently fully support the semantics of
weak symbols like ELF does.  Specifically, since a DLL has to be
fully-resolved when it is linked, any references to e.g. operators new/delete
get statically resolved as internal calls within the DLL, and then when you
attempt to define a custom operator new/delete override within your
executable, it doesn't get interposed between the already-resolved calls and
their destinations within the DLL.

  This would make the C++ compiler non-compliant, so as it all works OK with a
static library, I'm shipping it that way for now.

  I plan to work on improving weak symbol support in binutils to resolve this
problem in the long run; I think we can make it work with a little bit of
thunk stubbery[*].

> Also, is OpenMP available?  Is it being worked on?

  ? dunno.  That's a whole nother story, isn't it?

    cheers,
      DaveK

[*]  - Or perhaps stunk thubbery[**]...
[**] - Bring me .... a thubbery!

-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]