On Feb 21 11:31, Chris Sutcliffe wrote: > On 21 February 2013 10:38, NightStrike wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > >> On Feb 21 21:33, JonY wrote: > >>> On 2/21/2013 20:40, NightStrike wrote: > >>> >> I've started looking at the patches, they definitely aren't trivial. > >>> >> I'll probably be releasing it as experimental. > >>> > > >>> > There are local cygwin patches to gcc? > >>> > > >>> > >>> Yes, about 100KB of it. I confess I don't know what most of is for, my > >>> understanding of the gcc internals are limited. > >> > >> I assume some (or all) of them are already upstream, but they were not > >> backported into the 4.5.x branch. It might be a good idea to start out > >> with a clean upstream build and then look into the patches if they still > >> make some sense. > > > > Are they in 4.6? If so, why not just start fresh and clean with a 4.6 > > 'chain that needs zero patching? > > I believe Corinna means going to later version of GCC, preferably > straight to 4.7 would be great.
Exactly. The question is then, what patches from the 4.5.3 gcc were not applied upstream and still make sense today. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Maintainer cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat
