Re: cygwin gcc 3.4 and cygwin

[Christopher Faylor <cgf-cygwin at cygwin dot com>]

Still talking about this, eh?  Somehow I thought it had died down
before I went on my business trip.

On Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 11:57:02AM -0600, Brian Ford wrote:
>Vanilla gcc 3.2.x is NOT ABI compatible with Cygwin's pre 3.2 gcc,
>fact.  I wanted to know why this was allowed to persist given the
>simple patch required to fix it, question.  I had seen Mr.  Faylor make
>statements before to the effect of: doubles in structures are not that
>common so who cares,

You can take it as a given that if you use different versions of
compilers there may be some incompatibilities.  The version of gcc
released with cygwin is not the same as the trunk version so there will
be incompatibilities.

>so I advised caution in his use of that compiler for official Cygwin
>released software.

Did you see Danny Smith's reply to this thread where he indicated that
this was fixed on the gcc trunk on 2003-02-16?  If so, that would imply
that your advisement of caution was misplaced.

>>If mr Faylor tells you not to worry because Cygwin is safe, that means
>>that you shouldn't worry because Cygwin is *safe*.
>>
>I have confidence that Mr.  Faylor is a very competent individual.  We
>all overlook things from time to time though, and his previous comments
>about the issue in question were also sarcastic and not informative.  A
>single declarative sentence would have addressed all my concerns,
>instead of the consistent sarcasim I received.

This is an unappreciated exaggeration.  You sent a sarcastic response.
I replied.  That was it.  I clarified in several subsequent messages and
yet, here you are, still going on as if every message you've ever received
from me has been unhelpful.  That is not so and you know it is not so.

The bottom line here is that if you want to make a change, submit a
patch.  I know you know how to do that since I've approved one of your
patches in gdb.  I also know that I suggested that you should be working
against "offical branches" when you asked about this on 2003-02-13.

Again, I strongly urge you to go on with getting your FSF assignment in
place so that there will be no impediment to getting your patches
accepted.  Getting approved by the FSF can take some time.

cgf

--
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/