On Tuesday 10 October 2006 17:28 Mikhail Fursov wrote: > Nope, just the fact that there always will configurations we do not > support. And the best we can do is to sum all of those we do support. > For example: Linux user may read the configuration we do support, install > all of the needed environment and run the VM happily. It could better > solution (or alternative) for user then asking a forum and waiting a fix.
A better solution would be if he sends us a patch which fixes his problem. It is open source, isn't it? If it doesn't work for you, fix it yourself. The more people care about some platform or configuration, the better it works. Being more serious, is gcc version so important? I mean gcc is slowly hardening rules of C/C++ language interpretation. That is the reason why we had problems moving from 3.3 to 3.4 and then to 4.x. Personally I use 4.1.1 which is the latest stable for Gentoo and it compiles harmony ok. The warnings which were fixed for 4.x don't cause problems on older versions. Should be also specify compilation flags? Like we support -mprefetch-loop-arrays but don't support -funroll-all-loops? It looks silly to me. All software has bugs and we may encounter bugs in gcc just like everyone else. Those who have problems with some particular version can investigate and possibly find a solution or workaround. Those who don't want to deal with it can use a binary build. > On 10 Oct 2006 19:45:49 +0700, Egor Pasko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On the 0x1FE day of Apache Harmony Mikhail Fursov wrote: > > > On 10 Oct 2006 19:29:06 +0700, Egor Pasko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > why hide from problems? let's fix 'em all (jokingly) > > > > > > Is it possible with Linux? :) > > > > holy war? :) -- Gregory Shimansky, Intel Middleware Products Division --------------------------------------------------------------------- Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
