The SUNW prefix will be dropped from all
packages for future OpenSolaris releases.
To be replaced with ORCL or?
Sorry, couldn't resist... ;)
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
Just as an update on what happened:
The OS 2009.06-b111b repository contains these packages:
SUNWbinutils 2.15
SUNWgnu-mp 4.2.4
SUNWmpfr 2.3.2
GCC-dev 4.3.2
What I ended up doing is requesting those packages to be updated to the current
released versions to support GCC 4.3.3 and GCC
I am using 4.3.3 and 4.4.0 compiled both 32bit and 64bit that
I downloaded for http://gcc.gnu.org
Same for GMP and MPFR, downloading from the respective
open source locations.
I have not built binutils
Jim
///
ken mays wrote:
Just as an update on what happened:
The OS
gcc 4.3.2 is available in 2009.06:
gcc-dev-4
gcc-432
gcc-runtime-432
Also, binutils 2.19 was integrated into Nevada a few builds ago. It
will be in the next release of OpenSolaris.
George
ken mays wrote:
Just as an update on what happened:
The OS 2009.06-b111b repository contains these
--- On Fri, 6/12/09, Moinak Ghosh moin...@belenix.org wrote:
From: Moinak Ghosh moin...@belenix.org
Subject: Re: [osol-discuss] GCC 4.4: Can we handle it?!?
To: ken mays maybird1...@yahoo.com
Cc: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Date: Friday, June 12, 2009, 11:18 AM
I have already
Glenn Lagasse glenn.laga...@sun.com wrote:
The bits from Indiana which may become Solaris.Next did not go through
ARC either ;-)
*yet*.
They *will* go through the ARC process before they are shipped in
Solaris.Next.
Given the fact that there are _many_ changes to be discussed, this
* Joerg Schilling (joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de) wrote:
Glenn Lagasse glenn.laga...@sun.com wrote:
The bits from Indiana which may become Solaris.Next did not go through
ARC either ;-)
*yet*.
They *will* go through the ARC process before they are shipped in
Solaris.Next.
And you're waiting for the ARC review to do that? I
haven't looked too closely but I'm not generally aware
of any security problems introduced by pfexec in OpenSolaris.
By default OpenSolaris gives the default user adminstrator privileges, allowing
any program run by that user to execute
Marc Glisse wrote:
Upgrading GCCfss to 4.4.0 is included in our plans.
Hello,
I am definitely not a lawyer, but it seems to me that the new GCC runtime library
exception adopted in gcc-4.4 was written specifically so that things like gccfss
are forbidden unless you opensource the backend
I agree...i think the current approachis very windowsish (Pre-vista) and can
only lead to problems.
2009/6/17 Moinak Ghosh moin...@belenix.org
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 11:41 PM, Luriey...@gmx.co.uk wrote:
And you're waiting for the ARC review to do that? I
haven't looked too closely but I'm
Mark Martin storycraf...@gmail.com wrote:
I simply meant that Debian's philosophy is that absolutely nothing
_not_ free (read: not opensourced) gets intot the distro. That's not
This is unfortunately not true. They e.g. publish a fork from my software that
has been changed to bne in conflict
Marc Glisse wrote:
Hopefully,
this will spark the GCCfss resources to update to
GCCfss 4.4.0 as well
(see: http://cooltools.sunsource.net/gcc).
Upgrading GCCfss to 4.4.0 is included in our plans.
George
For gccfss and gcc-4.4, there may be legal reasons preventing the mix, so don't
hold
Upgrading GCCfss to 4.4.0 is included in our plans.
Hello,
I am definitely not a lawyer, but it seems to me that the new GCC runtime
library exception adopted in gcc-4.4 was written specifically so that things
like gccfss are forbidden unless you opensource the backend with an appropriate
Hopefully,
this will spark the GCCfss resources to update to
GCCfss 4.4.0 as well
(see: http://cooltools.sunsource.net/gcc).
For gccfss and gcc-4.4, there may be legal reasons preventing the mix, so don't
hold your breath.
Btw, I still believe that in opensolaris we should not consider
This part really gets confusing to me. Is the opensolaris/debain endeavor
{opensolaris.com} a more focused business alternative /grant money available.
Does that mean opensolaris.org will always be a reorganization effort. If
solaris opts into supported solaris11 does everything good go to a
john kroll wrote:
This part really gets confusing to me.
Which part? Context, please!
--
Ian.
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Sorry sir my comment was not specific to GCC 4.4
OpenSolaris and Debian being, as examples, tending
towards opposite ends of that spectrum.
At the end of the day, this is a lot of hot air over little.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 4:38 PM, john krolljek0...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
Sorry sir my comment was not specific to GCC 4.4
OpenSolaris and Debian being, as examples, tending
towards opposite ends of that spectrum.
At the end of the day, this is a lot of hot air over little.
I simply meant
Ian Collins i...@ianshome.com wrote:
As Ken says, 4.4.x is where all the gcc effort is going, especially with
C++. Shouldn't OpenSolaris be moving with the times?
What do you mean with moving with the times?
Jörg
--
EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353
Scott Rotondo scott.roto...@sun.com wrote:
You can at least compile ON with gcc 4.x now, though that's a recent
development. See CR 6795209.
I have been told that you can compile the Linux kernel using Sun Studio since
more than a year now but it does not work...
Do you know whether the
Hi Ken,
V čt, 11. 06. 2009 v 20:57, ken mays píše:
Hello,
Since developers are getting more involved in using the GCC compiler and
especially the GCC 4.4.x compilers, I started wondering why not migrate
to GCC 4.4.x sooner than later?? We have more community developers
building, testing,
Regardless, as long as Sun Studio remains closed, it is
important that the OpenSolaris community provide a viable,
up-to-date, open source option as much as possible.
Cheers,
-- Shawn Walker
Just so everyone knows, this has nothing to do with Sun Studio. This is
just to see if we can move
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 8:15 PM, ken maysmaybird1...@yahoo.com wrote:
Regardless, as long as Sun Studio remains closed, it is
important that the OpenSolaris community provide a viable,
up-to-date, open source option as much as possible.
Cheers,
-- Shawn Walker
Just so everyone knows, this
ken mays wrote:
Note: The idea started when I wanted Phoronix to do their testing benchmark article using GCC 4.4.0 with OpenSolaris 2009.06 versus Fedora 11.
Does your spec file set the default to -m64?
A couple of the tests ran slow against Fedora not due to gcc 3.x versus 4.x
but instead
--- On Fri, 6/12/09, Milan Jurik milan.ju...@sun.com wrote:
From: Milan Jurik milan.ju...@sun.com
Subject: Re: [osol-discuss] GCC 4.4: Can we handle it?!?
To: ken mays maybird1...@yahoo.com
Cc: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Date: Friday, June 12, 2009, 10:36 AM
Hi Ken,
V čt, 11
ken mays wrote:
I submitted an RFE (#9444) for GCC 4.4.x at:
http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=9444
and will review the submittal of an ARC case.
You really want to talk to Stefan Teleman and the folks in tools-compilers
about this - if it was easy to do, it would have been
Alan Coopersmith wrote:
ken mays wrote:
I submitted an RFE (#9444) for GCC 4.4.x at:
http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=9444
and will review the submittal of an ARC case.
You really want to talk to Stefan Teleman and the folks in tools-compilers
about this - if it was easy to
--- On Fri, 6/12/09, George Vasick george.vas...@sun.com wrote:
From: George Vasick george.vas...@sun.com
Subject: Re: [osol-discuss] GCC 4.4: Can we handle it?!?
To: Alan Coopersmith alan.coopersm...@sun.com
Cc: ken mays maybird1...@yahoo.com, opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Date
Hello,
Since developers are getting more involved in using the GCC compiler and
especially the GCC 4.4.x compilers, I started wondering why not migrate
to GCC 4.4.x sooner than later?? We have more community developers
building, testing, and reporting on GCC 4.4.x than before.
What is the
* ken mays (maybird1...@yahoo.com) wrote:
Hello,
Since developers are getting more involved in using the GCC compiler
and especially the GCC 4.4.x compilers, I started wondering why not
migrate to GCC 4.4.x sooner than later?? We have more community
developers building, testing, and
Glenn Lagasse wrote:
* ken mays (maybird1...@yahoo.com) wrote:
Hello,
Since developers are getting more involved in using the GCC compiler
and especially the GCC 4.4.x compilers, I started wondering why not
migrate to GCC 4.4.x sooner than later?? We have more community
developers building,
* Ian Collins (i...@ianshome.com) wrote:
Glenn Lagasse wrote:
* ken mays (maybird1...@yahoo.com) wrote:
Hello,
Since developers are getting more involved in using the GCC compiler
and especially the GCC 4.4.x compilers, I started wondering why not
migrate to GCC 4.4.x sooner than
Glenn Lagasse wrote:
* Ian Collins (i...@ianshome.com) wrote:
Glenn Lagasse wrote:
* ken mays (maybird1...@yahoo.com) wrote:
Hello,
Since developers are getting more involved in using the GCC compiler
and especially the GCC 4.4.x compilers, I started wondering why not
Jim Langston wrote:
This is where my confusion rests - SUNWgcc is still 3.4.3, it is
through the development package that 4.3.3 gets loaded, are they
both supported ? I'm confused because SUNWgcc seems distinctly
directed as core part of OS, whereas, development/gcc seems to
have a you're on
* Jim Langston (jim.langs...@sun.com) wrote:
Glenn Lagasse wrote:
* Ian Collins (i...@ianshome.com) wrote:
Glenn Lagasse wrote:
* ken mays (maybird1...@yahoo.com) wrote:
Hello,
Since developers are getting more involved in using the GCC compiler
and especially the GCC
* Shawn Walker (swal...@opensolaris.org) wrote:
Jim Langston wrote:
This is where my confusion rests - SUNWgcc is still 3.4.3, it is
through the development package that 4.3.3 gets loaded, are they
both supported ? I'm confused because SUNWgcc seems distinctly
directed as core part of OS,
Glenn Lagasse wrote:
* Jim Langston (jim.langs...@sun.com) wrote:
Glenn Lagasse wrote:
* Ian Collins (i...@ianshome.com) wrote:
Glenn Lagasse wrote:
* ken mays (maybird1...@yahoo.com) wrote:
Hello,
Since developers are getting more
Glenn Lagasse wrote:
* Shawn Walker (swal...@opensolaris.org) wrote:
Jim Langston wrote:
This is where my confusion rests - SUNWgcc is still 3.4.3, it is
through the development package that 4.3.3 gets loaded, are they
both supported ? I'm confused because SUNWgcc seems distinctly
directed as
* Mark Martin (storycraf...@gmail.com) wrote:
I can't speak definitively about this, but my best guess is that SUNWgcc
is still 3.4.3 because the ON consolidation hasn't qualified later
builds of GCC for building ON. And so, the supported method for
compiling code using GCC in ON is to use
Glenn Lagasse wrote:
I can't speak definitively about this, but my best guess is that SUNWgcc
is still 3.4.3 because the ON consolidation hasn't qualified later
builds of GCC for building ON. And so, the supported method for
compiling code using GCC in ON is to use 3.4.3 until such time as
* Scott Rotondo (scott.roto...@sun.com) wrote:
Glenn Lagasse wrote:
I can't speak definitively about this, but my best guess is that SUNWgcc
is still 3.4.3 because the ON consolidation hasn't qualified later
builds of GCC for building ON. And so, the supported method for
compiling code
#define developers please
i think ppl are using gcc on *solaris because:
a) they dont know that suncc exist
b) they havent got enough skill to fix gccism
b2) there are too many gccism and they are lazy
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 9:57 PM, ken maysmaybird1...@yahoo.com wrote:
Hello,
Since
sorry, forgot the
c) hardcore opensource/gnu fanboyz
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 12:43 AM, Andras Barnaandras.ba...@gmail.com wrote:
#define developers please
i think ppl are using gcc on *solaris because:
a) they dont know that suncc exist
b) they havent got enough skill to fix gccism
b2)
You do a disservice by dismissing anyone who may know about Sun Studio
as either lacking skill or being lazy. There are plenty of developers
who have written software on other platforms (OS X, Linux, etc.) who
have written perfectly good software with gcc-isms, and have users (like
us)
the discussion is not about having or not having gcc *in* solaris.
gcc3 as well as gcc4 is available in opensolaris 2009.06
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 12:49 AM, Stephen Lauste...@opensolaris.org wrote:
You do a disservice by dismissing anyone who may know about Sun Studio as
either lacking skill
Stephen Lau wrote:
You do a disservice by dismissing anyone who may know about Sun Studio
as either lacking skill or being lazy. There are plenty of developers
who have written software on other platforms (OS X, Linux, etc.) who
have written perfectly good software with gcc-isms, and have
Glenn Lagasse wrote:
I can't speak definitively about this, but my best guess is that SUNWgcc
is still 3.4.3 because the ON consolidation hasn't qualified later
builds of GCC for building ON. And so, the supported method for
compiling code using GCC in ON is to use 3.4.3 until such time as
Shawn Walker wrote:
Stephen Lau wrote:
You do a disservice by dismissing anyone who may know about Sun
Studio as either lacking skill or being lazy. There are plenty of
developers who have written software on other platforms (OS X, Linux,
etc.) who have written perfectly good software with
casper@sun.com wrote:
Glenn Lagasse wrote:
I can't speak definitively about this, but my best guess is that
SUNWgcc
is still 3.4.3 because the ON consolidation hasn't qualified later
builds of GCC for building ON. And so, the supported method for
compiling code using GCC in ON is to
49 matches
Mail list logo
