? regarding releases

? regarding releases

[Bill Deegan]

Greetings,

Would it be possible to add to the standard .tar's you build.
everything that is in the everything needed to build c,c++, and relevent
libraries?

Thanks,
Bill Deegan

Re: ? regarding releases

[Joe Buck]

> Greetings,
> 
> Would it be possible to add to the standard .tar's you build.
> everything that is in the everything needed to build c,c++, and relevent
> libraries?

What specifically do you mean?  What do you think is missing?

Re: ? regarding releases

[Zack Weinberg]

On Fri, 29 Jan 1999 18:16:40 -0800, Bill Deegan wrote:
>Greetings,
>
>Would it be possible to add to the standard .tar's you build.
>everything that is in the everything needed to build c,c++, and relevent
>libraries?

What would you like us to add?  From our point of view, `everything
needed' is already there.

zw

Re: ? regarding releases

[Bill Deegan]

Zack Weinberg wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 29 Jan 1999 18:16:40 -0800, Bill Deegan wrote:
> >Greetings,
> >
> >Would it be possible to add to the standard .tar's you build.
> >everything that is in the everything needed to build c,c++, and relevent
> >libraries?
> 
> What would you like us to add?  From our point of view, `everything
> needed' is already there.

It's not that you're missing anything, it's that I don't really want the
tests 
or fortran at all, so the standard-(testing, and fortran stuff), is what
I'm thinking
would be nice.

-Bill

Re: ? regarding releases

[Zack Weinberg]

On Fri, 29 Jan 1999 18:36:52 -0800, Bill Deegan wrote:
>Zack Weinberg wrote:
>> 
>> On Fri, 29 Jan 1999 18:16:40 -0800, Bill Deegan wrote:
>> >Greetings,
>> >
>> >Would it be possible to add to the standard .tar's you build.
>> >everything that is in the everything needed to build c,c++, and relevent
>> >libraries?
>> 
>> What would you like us to add?  From our point of view, `everything
>> needed' is already there.
>
>It's not that you're missing anything, it's that I don't really want
>the tests or fortran at all, so the standard-(testing, and fortran
>stuff), is what I'm thinking would be nice.

egcs-core-X.Y.Z.tar.gz is I believe what you are looking for.  You
might need to pull down -g++, -libstdc++ tarfiles too.

zw

Re: ? regarding releases

[Joe Buck]

You (Bill Deegan) write:
> > >Would it be possible to add to the standard .tar's you build.
> > >everything that is in the everything needed to build c,c++, and relevent
> > >libraries?

Someone answered:
> > What would you like us to add?  From our point of view, `everything
> > needed' is already there.

You again:
> It's not that you're missing anything, it's that I don't really want the
> tests 
> or fortran at all, so the standard-(testing, and fortran stuff), is what
> I'm thinking
> would be nice.

Then don't use the word "add".

Again, it's already there.  The README file in
/pub/egcs/releases/egcs-X.X.X
explains what you need.

In your case, it appears that you would want to download two tars:
egcs-core-X.X.X.tar.gz and egcs-g++-X.X.X.tar.gz.  The first is just
the C compiler and core, the second adds the C++ compiler and libraries.

Re: ? regarding releases

[Bill Deegan]

Joe,

What I said was could you add to the standard (tar)s you build.
(add another tar with different content), not add more to any of the
many
tars.

egcs-everything-but-no-testing-or-fortran.tar.gz would be nice.

> 
> You (Bill Deegan) write:
> > > >Would it be possible to add to the standard .tar's you build.
> > > >everything that is in the everything needed to build c,c++, and relevent
> > > >libraries?
> 
> Someone answered:
> > > What would you like us to add?  From our point of view, `everything
> > > needed' is already there.
> 
> You again:
> > It's not that you're missing anything, it's that I don't really want the
> > tests
> > or fortran at all, so the standard-(testing, and fortran stuff), is what
> > I'm thinking
> > would be nice.
> 
> Then don't use the word "add".
I think that is the proper word for what I was asking, just perhaps you
didn't
quite understand what I was saying.

> 
> Again, it's already there.  The README file in
> /pub/egcs/releases/egcs-X.X.X
> explains what you need.
> 
> In your case, it appears that you would want to download two tars:
> egcs-core-X.X.X.tar.gz and egcs-g++-X.X.X.tar.gz.  The first is just
> the C compiler and core, the second adds the C++ compiler and libraries.

Re: ? regarding releases

[Marc Espie]

In article < 36B275A8.8501A9A7@cadence.com > you write:
>Joe,

>What I said was could you add to the standard (tar)s you build.
>(add another tar with different content), not add more to any of the
>many
>tars.

>egcs-everything-but-no-testing-or-fortran.tar.gz would be nice.

Why all that ? Who cares about chill anyways ? 
Or java ? :)
Or objc ?

Look, I don't think it's reasonable... Everybody will soon want:
egcs-everything-I-use-but-nothing-else.tgz

The maths are simple: C++, java, chill, objc, fortran, that makes for 32 
combinations. Double that for a test/no-test version. Do you really want
that ?

apart from the releases, not having the tests along is... egoistical.
Do you even trust the compiler before you've run the tests ? I don't,
and I know I'm right, I even uncovered a major bug in exception handling
on a platform that way.

and I may be paranoid, but I don't trust the releases either...

Re: ? regarding releases

[Marc Espie]

On Sat, Jan 30, 1999 at 09:46:35AM -0500, N8TM@aol.com wrote:
> It doesn't take that much longer to download the patches, but the schemes to
> avoid spending time building it are up to the experimenter, and vary by
> platform.  I think it works to run gzip -r on the unwanted directories prior
> to configure, and unzip those directories when applying a patch file.  On some
> systems it may be possible to accomplish this by flipping read permission.

Like duh ! The 1.1.1 release doesn't support it, but there is a whole new
instrumentation in the snapshots specifically for that... 

--enable-languages='c,c++,fortran77', as an argument for configure.

The only part that is still in the snapshots and that I routinely remove
(hint, hint) as I don't wish to build it again & again is texinfo...

-- 
	Marc Espie		
|anime, sf, juggling, unicycle, acrobatics, comics...
|AmigaOS, OpenBSD, C++, perl, Icon, PostScript...
| `real programmers don't die, they just get out of beta'

Re: ? regarding releases

[Jeffrey A Law]

  In message < a4e1686a.36b31b4b@aol.com >you write:
  > In a message dated 1/30/99 5:12:33 AM Pacific Standard Time,
  > espie@quatramaran.ens.fr writes:
  > 
  > <<  Who cares about chill anyways ? 
  > 
  > Especially when the install is broken on some environments, possibly
  > intentionally, as no one wants to support it.
Folks doing pascal :-)  There's lots of code in chill that can be re-used for
pascal.

  >  Or java ? :) >>
  > 
  > which must not be all it's cracked up to be, or there would be a support
  > library.
There is a library on the way, but we have to get the legal issues sorted out
before it can be donated.

jeff

Re: ? regarding releases

[N8TM]

In a message dated 1/30/99 5:12:33 AM Pacific Standard Time,
espie@quatramaran.ens.fr writes:

<<  Who cares about chill anyways ? 

Especially when the install is broken on some environments, possibly
intentionally, as no one wants to support it.

 Or java ? :) >>

which must not be all it's cracked up to be, or there would be a support
library.

It doesn't take that much longer to download the patches, but the schemes to
avoid spending time building it are up to the experimenter, and vary by
platform.  I think it works to run gzip -r on the unwanted directories prior
to configure, and unzip those directories when applying a patch file.  On some
systems it may be possible to accomplish this by flipping read permission.