3.2.3 using the 3.3 directory is the only one that has consistently
worked for me.
3.3.2 using the 3.4 directory is very broken and unsupported.
Dmitry recently reported that 3.4.1 using the current directory produces
larger code for reasons unknown.
I use binutils-2.15 patched for msp430f161x and compile gcc from
gcc-core. I don't bother with gdb at all.
I agree with Steven.
Garst
Steven Johnson wrote:
Some documentation somewhere would be good. We get this question a lot.
Its been a while since I rebuilt the tools, so I dont know the answer
to the question. Once I got a stable version that did what I needed,
I stopped upgarding. Now I wouldnt know which is the 'best' 'most
stable' version anymore either. Having to use the gcc-3.4 directory
to patch gcc-3.3.2 is far from intuitive. What about not only the
readme, but renaming the directories to actually be logical, and not a
historical and confusing accident.
It makes me woder how many people have tried to build the compiler and
given up in disgust, because they had mis matched patches to gcc
source. It might explain why Ive heard from a number of people that
this compiler is unusable crap. which is not true, and I dispute it.
But their response is always 'well i could never get it to work'.
Dont forget, for every one person who posts to the list that they
couldnt get it to work, there are probably 10 others who either arent
subscribed or havent posted their failures to achieve anything
meaningful (probably due to fear of ridicule).
Steven
Svein E. Seldal wrote:
Hi,
In the CVS server on sourceforge, there are a lot of different
patches for different versions of gcc.
What is considered the most stable and "best" version of those? I'm
using the CVS's gcc-3.4/ patch against gcc-3.3.2, but I'm always
running into a couple of bugs caused by the compiler.
What's the status of the gcc-current? And what gcc version is it
indended to be patched against? (Tip: Maybe we should add a little
readme in each of the gcc patch directories telling what gcc version
it should be patched against.)
Regards,
Svein Seldal
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by OSTG. Have you noticed the changes on
Linux.com, ITManagersJournal and NewsForge in the past few weeks? Now,
one more big change to announce. We are now OSTG- Open Source Technology
Group. Come see the changes on the new OSTG site. www.ostg.com
_______________________________________________
Mspgcc-users mailing list
Mspgcc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mspgcc-users
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by OSTG. Have you noticed the changes on
Linux.com, ITManagersJournal and NewsForge in the past few weeks? Now,
one more big change to announce. We are now OSTG- Open Source Technology
Group. Come see the changes on the new OSTG site. www.ostg.com
_______________________________________________
Mspgcc-users mailing list
Mspgcc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mspgcc-users
