On Thursday June 7 2007 06:51:39 pm Kevin Day wrote: > As I was working out problems with uClibc-0.9.29, I discovered that > gcc-4.2.0 is not only more stable than the gcc-4.1.x series, but also > had fewer problems that the gcc-3.4.6. > > It may not be worth rushing it in at this point, but it is very much > worth considering.
Last time I looked at a GCC snapshot I noticed they added uClibc support. I'm not sure if it's in gcc-4.2 or gcc-4.3. Binutils, and GDB, should do the same eventually. GCC has the master copy of the top-level makefile (and libiberty), and other packages sync to GCC from time to time. The majority of the gcc-4.2 differences I noticed were better, more specific, warning flags. I didn't see why it's qualified for a minor version number change. From what I see on google, it doesn't look like gcc-4.2 breaks any packages. GCC-4.2 also has improves "combined tree" support, and now it bootstraps by default. Glibc-2.6 does break some packages. Glibc-2.5 doesn't have great linuxthreads support, so I'm strongly considering disabling libc threads for Linux-2.4, and adding gnu's portable threads package. The alternatives are not great... like using linuxthreads-snapshots, which are not maintained well, or patch Linux-2.4 for nptl, which is also not maintained well. Using PTH would be more stable. There are a few architectures that disable threading in Glibc, so it should be reasonably supported. robert
pgpSFZm7o0c23.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/hlfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
