>you didnt mention if your code is c or c++ A lot of both.
>how big it is, Quite, around 20 subprojects that compile into binaries, of varying size. > if it has strict standards conformance Need posix, the rest we implement ourselves. >or if it's kernel code Not my team's projects, no. >in general, gcc3 is much more conforming to the c++ standard, How? FM to RT... :-) >basically, upgrading the compiler is no big deal, and several compilers >can co-exist peacefully That means simply a binary of gcc and a binary of gcc3, Right? Or duplicate sets of system includes, libraries and the like? Sounds tempting if it's something simple. Prob is we have >10 developers working on this system, I don't want to go into time overhead due to compiler compatibility issues, that'll cause us to waste half a week figuring out why half the code won't compile.. ;-) -- Miki Shapiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Unixophilic Software Developer Aladdin Knowledge Systems --------------------------------------------- Tel: +972-(4)-8811433 ICQ: 3EE853 --------------------------------------------- If at first you don't succeed... .. SkyDiving is probbably not for you. On 02/14/2002 12:10:42 PM ZE2 mulix wrote: > >On Thu, 14 Feb 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> We're developing on stock RH 6.2 (for product compliency), but ran into a >> gcc bug when overriding new/delete operators. It was fixed in later >> versions of gcc (2.95.2 +) , so now we want to upgrade compiler. >> >> Question: >> What does upping to gcc 3.x involve (other than installing an RPM), what >> could be the ramifications on how our (quite big) project compiles, and how >> well is its backwards-compatibility with gcc 2.x? Should I just take 2.95.3 >> if I want to sleep well at night? > >you didnt mention if your code is c or c++, how big it is, if it has >strict standards conformance or if it's kernel code, all of which could >influence the answer to your question. > >in general, gcc3 is much more conforming to the c++ standard, and breaks >binary compatibility wrt c++ ABI with earlier versions. it's also >relatively new, compilerwise, so it might still have some bugs. gcc295, >on the other hand is a "maintenance release", and is pretty stable and >close to the compiler you're using. > >basically, upgrading the compiler is no big deal, and several compilers >can co-exist peacefully (my systems have three compilers on them at the >moment). just get a test box, install the new compiler on it and try... >if you're installnig from rpm you might have to play with the --prefix >or some such, unless the compiler is meant to be installed alongside >another compiler (like gcc, kgcc and gcc3 on rh7.2 systems). if >installing from source, *read the documentation*, although it all boils >down to a few options to configure, if i remember correctly. > >hope this helps, more info would probably help us help you. >-- > >mulix > >http://vipe.technion.ac.il/~mulix/ >http://syscalltrack.sf.net/ > > > ******************************* IMPORTANT ! ********************************** The content of this email and any attachments are confidential and intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender immediately. Do not disclose the content of this message or make copies. This email was scanned by eSafe Mail for viruses, vandals and other malicious content. ****************************************************************************** ================================================================= To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
