> On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 23:31:57 +0200 John Tytgat wrote: > > In message > alan buckley wrote: > >> >>> On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 17:33:26 +0200 John Tytgat wrote: >>> >>> A proposal and/or summery what I would like to see happening with respect >>> to the following GCCSDK releases: >>> >> [snip] >>> As said before, this release will only contain the static libraries and >>> we'll reserve the shared library feature for the next release after doing >>> some more testing. >> >> I assume by that you mean it will only support building and linking static >> libraries as gcc itself uses shared libraries? > > No, you can build the GCC binaries using static libraries by giving the > build-it scripts the '-static' option. And the 'create-gcckits' will > give you then AIF Absolute binaries. Oh that's interesting. I hadn't realised that.
> >> [snip] >>> >>> Anything else which better gets addressed before the Release 1 ? >> >> I'm attempting to test a rebuild of wesnoth to check the gcc exception >> problem that you have put a fix in for. That was the only major >> problem I had. > > Yes, that would be great to hear a confirmation that this problem is > solved. I'm still working on it. > >> Unfortunately my setup is making getting a rebuild >> of wesnoth more involved then it should be. > > :-( Anything which can get be improved in Autobuilder ? It's hard to tell as it takes so long to build on my Vista machine that I can never remember exactly what goes wrong each time. But I always have to restart the build. The one thing I do remember was that on Cygwin it had a problem running nm-new in the riscos build. By adding a shortcut or renaming it to nm-new.exe it worked. > >>> Oh yes, anticipated release date, well obviously when it is ready but a >>> Xmas release would be nice, wouldn't it ? >> >> Yes, this would be great. >> >> Would it also be possible to get the GCCSDK packages on the >> autobuilder website for either release one or pre-release2 build? > > I don't see why not but I probably could use some handholding for getting > the details right. > No problem. Hopefully it's fairly straightforward now. But it will be a good test to see if someone other than I can do it. Which version would you want packaging rel 1 or pre 2? Personally I'd like pre 2 as it would allow us to start packaging shared libraries, but I understand if you would prefer rel 1. Regards, Alan _________________________________________________________________ Imagine a life without walls. See the possibilities. http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/122465943/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ GCCSDK mailing list [email protected] Bugzilla: http://www.riscos.info/bugzilla/index.cgi List Info: http://www.riscos.info/mailman/listinfo/gcc Main Page: http://www.riscos.info/index.php/GCCSDK
