From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13017 invoked by alias); 15 Jul 2002 12:36:52 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Received: (qmail 13010 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2002 12:36:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO web21007.mail.yahoo.com) (216.136.227.61) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 15 Jul 2002 12:36:51 -0000 Message-ID: <20020715123651.12383.qmail@web21007.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [216.215.132.255] by web21007.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 15 Jul 2002 05:36:51 PDT Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2002 08:02:00 -0000 From: Nicholas Wourms Subject: Re: Available for test: gcc-3.1.1-2 gcc2-2.95.3-8 To: cygwin@cygwin.com In-Reply-To: <20020715052013.GA18499@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2002-07/txt/msg01151.txt.bz2 --- Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Mon, Jul 15, 2002 at 12:46:17AM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote: > >Question about threading models for -mno-cygwin: > > Threading should work correctly for either the -mno-cygwin or the > -mcygwin > cases. > > >Also, I've seen repeated references that "mingw's compiler will be > built > >with dwarf2 exceptions". > > Cygwin and mingw are using the same code base now. So both use dwarf2 > exceptions. > > >(If so, then the "regular" mingw build -- which is claimed to be use > >dwarf2 EH, and the cygiwn build will both have dwarf2 EH, since > >mknetrel/extra/gcc *doesn't* say --enable-sjlj...) Which is good. If > >I'm right. > > Right. I've actually mentioned this in a previous message and I'm sure > I'll be mentioning it again. > > Maybe we need a GCC FAQ. Or maybe the (currently nonexistent) gcc > README > should mention this. > > FWIW, I'm on build #4010 right now. "gcc -mno-cygwin -E" wasn't working > right. > Not to presume to tell you what to do, but perhaps it might be prudent to go ahead and use the gcc-3.2 branch instead. If I read it correctly, they are planning a gcc-3.2.1 release when the gcc-3.1.2 was supposed to be released (and the webpage says GCC 3.1.2 release [Sep 15 2002]). I suppose it depends on how you look at it, but skipping to gcc-3.2 might save some headaches in regards to YA C++ ABI change. I suppose the mingw people would have to do the same, so I guess if they aren't on board then this can't be done. It may not be the best idea to release a development branch based version, but it may save many headaches in the future, especially given the fickle nature of windows shared libraries. Just my 2c on the situation... Cheers, Nicholas __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Autos - Get free new car price quotes http://autos.yahoo.com -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/