From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BE92C3858C78 for ; Fri, 29 Sep 2023 08:14:56 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org BE92C3858C78 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1695975296; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references; bh=O729MqU6jNPqhP6D8KViJpXTXbM+/DUzGdBAONY+dOw=; b=POtRORYwRnH+Fs5kG1moV/1q27ZarCMHqlbecsqd27+0hO6fkb3HRHV3+96mUggqDC7F95 1iiMHhpZrEKzWsRGI5weOwYCCWJ9UhHoGfMrvvPN0ayInMRSaCGEVcTiKpt4gHCTQZMfHS 2u/vHsKVddq7NOkcn8YUTw2DlTlBokU= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mx-ext.redhat.com [66.187.233.73]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-184-83rZv86ZOTWxz824sSIdUg-1; Fri, 29 Sep 2023 04:14:50 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 83rZv86ZOTWxz824sSIdUg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A6E41C05149; Fri, 29 Sep 2023 08:14:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (unknown [10.39.193.202]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CAA82215670B; Fri, 29 Sep 2023 08:14:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.17.1/8.17.1) with ESMTPS id 38T8Ek8K987364 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 29 Sep 2023 10:14:47 +0200 Received: (from jakub@localhost) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.17.1/8.17.1/Submit) id 38T8EjEG987363; Fri, 29 Sep 2023 10:14:45 +0200 Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2023 10:14:45 +0200 From: Jakub Jelinek To: Richard Biener Cc: Jeff Law , Jason Merrill , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, richard.sandiford@arm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] Remove poly_int_pod Message-ID: Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: <8673fdfc-4b16-ff4a-8906-c47403cde825@redhat.com> <3e29a0ea-b143-4128-92bf-40f6fc01762b@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.1 on 10.11.54.6 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,RCVD_IN_SBL_CSS,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On Fri, Sep 29, 2023 at 08:31:47AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > > IIRC the primary reason we settled on gcc-4.8.x was RHEL7/Centos7. With > > RHEL 7 approaching EOL moving the baseline forward would seem to make sense. > > > > I'd want to know if this affects folks using SuSE's enterprise distro > > before actually making the change, but I'm broadly in favor of moving > > forward it it's not going to have a major impact on users that are using > > enterprise distros. > > We're thinking of making GCC 13 the last major release to officially > build for SLE12 which > also uses GCC 4.8, so we'd be fine with doing this for GCC 14. We'd need to figure out what to do with the OS on gcc{110,112,135} on CFarm, those are all CentOS 7.9 with gcc 4.8.5. Sure, one possibility would be to install some DTS gcc if CentOS has one somewhere (though looking around, /opt/at12.0 already has there gcc 8 from IBM Advanced Toolchain 12). Jakub