GCC 3.4.x + RTEMS 4.6.2 release.

[Karel Gardas]

First of all, thanks Joel and Ralf for really important information!

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005, Joel Sherrill <joel at OARcorp.com> wrote:

> Agreed ...gcc 3.3.x seems pretty OK.  All gcc versions have bugs, it
> is just a matter of if it one you care about. :)

As long as compiled MICO passes its testuite, I don't care about gcc bugs
at all. :-)

Joel:
> RTEMS exposes bugs in GCC 3.4.x.  I think we have reported the
> ones we trigger building the toolset and RTEMS.  However, it is
> late in the gcc 3.4 lifecycle and effort expended pushing on it
> gets better results pushing at 4.0.  Often the fix gets backported
> anyway.

Ralf:
> > For development, I am currently using
> > * binutils-2.15 w/o any patches.
> > * GCC-3.4-branch and GCC-HEAD (aka. GCC-4.0) without any patches rsp.
> > with local patches I am planning to commit to GCC in near future
> > applied.
> > * newlib-CVS + the newlib-patch I sent to this list a couple of days ago
> > applied.

Now, I will give a Ralf's combination a try, with the exception of using
just plain 3.4.3 compiler. If it does not work, I will move to 3.3.x or
eventually to 4.0.0 depending on if the required patches are commited.

>    + i386-rtems has a soft-float compiler error.  We have a
>      PR and the information for a solution.  Richard Henderson
>      made a suggestion yesterday on a better fix, we need to
>      decipher and implement.

Hmm, AFIAK soft-float is not used on pc386 BSP, isn't it? If it is not
then this should not affect me...

>    + sparc-rtems did not build.  I think I have this fixed but
>      suspect the sparc reorg in gcc and my update changed the
>      C++ ctor method for RTEMS.
>    + Ralf reported a m68k-rtems compiler error with paranoia.

I hope these do not affect x86 platform. BTW: I'm using Qemu for RTEMS
running now.

Thanks,
Karel
--
Karel Gardas                  kgardas at objectsecurity.com
ObjectSecurity Ltd.           http://www.objectsecurity.com