Re: Revisiting GCC's minimum MPFR version

["Richard Guenther" <richard.guenther@gmail.com>]

On Dec 9, 2007 11:05 PM, Kaveh R. GHAZI <ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu> wrote:
> As requested by Richard G here:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-05/msg00945.html
>
> I'm re-visiting during stage3 the minimum MPFR version required by GCC.
> At the time of the above post, mpfr-2.3.0 had not yet been released, but
> it was this past August, and one can obtain it here:
> http://www.mpfr.org/mpfr-current
>
> The current situation is that GCC requires only mpfr-2.2.0, however it
> recommends mpfr-2.2.1 in the documentation and configure checks.  (If
> configure find 2.2.0, it will say something like "buggy but acceptable"
> and continue bootstrapping).
>
> Also, there is some functionality for builtin bessel, remquo and gamma
> functions that is only active when mpfr-2.3.0 is available.  The testcase
> gcc.dg/torture/builtin-math-4.c for these mpfr-2.3.0 functions is XFAILed
> at the moment.
>
>
> Our options include:
>
> 1.  Do nothing.  Things work, don't break it.  Revisit again in stage1.
>
> 2.  Continue accepting 2.2.0, but update the recommended version from
>     2.2.1 to 2.3.0.  This would entail updating the configure warning,
>     the docs and the removing the XFAIL from the testcase.  This
>     option would cause no change in hard bootstrap requirements.
>
> 3.  In addtion to #2, hard fail for anything less than mpfr-2.3.0.
>
>
> I have no strong opinion on which way to go.

I would update the recommended version to 2.3.0 and fail for anything less
than 2.2.1.

Richard.