Re: GCC 3.3.2 kernel

[David Rhodus <drhodus@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Wednesday, October 29, 2003, at 08:04 AM, Craig Dooley wrote:

> Some of the stuff has been taken from FreeBSD.  Im currently trying to 
> work my
> way through makefiles to find out why things would be different on gcc 
> 2.95
> and gcc 3.3.2.
What happened there is, gcc started abiding by some C coding standards 
and not
just compiling any piece of junk someone gave it. It's funny how many 
people have
said something like "GCC is breaking my code now". When in fact their 
code is
breaking ISO coding standards and they'll need to formalize some 
justification to
the ISO committee if they want to continue coding in that manner. Or at 
the very
least start work on an internal compiler suite so they can use broken 
code.
>  Could we take binutils and gcc from their tree instead of a
> GNU import when the time comes?  I dont know if they have changed the 
> abi at
> all, but if it's already worked out from them, it's probably a much 
> better
> place to start.
I don't think that will really be necessary. Most people over estimate 
the amount of
work required for an upgrade of these. It can most likely be done in a 
day. Though
I was really hoping that gcc 3.4 would be out before we did an new 
import of the
compiler. But I don't think were going to be able to hold off that long 
as the amd64
port will has to have a newer gcc.
>   I was working on buildworld too, and I know amd has a couple
> bugs.  I've been thinking of a new package manager and would like to 
> get a
> working version of that in perl with static programs in /usr/lib/dfpkg 
> just
> as a test platform, but moving the base system to build packages 
> instead of
> installworld would be a nice test.

Sounds good. We've been needing someone to throw some man hours at
formalizing some code for a package manager system.

-DR