On 13/11/2017 18:56, Sebastian Huber wrote: > There will be no 5.1.X release with X != 0. We have a version scheme change > and > not simply a major version number bump. I think is quite good explained in the > GCC development page how it works (Version Numbering Scheme for GCC 5 and Up): > > https://gcc.gnu.org/develop.html
I knew there was some discussion about using this model, I was not aware this was the agreed path. I am fine with this approach and support it. > We need something similar in the new engineering guide. Yes. Should the wiki page [1] be updated to make it clear the approach we are taking until we have an engineering doc? > What do you mean with separate prefixes? I doubt that you can build a RTEMS > 4.1 > with the tool chain of RTEMS 4.10 and vice versa. Using the gcc approach changes this and what you say makes sense. In this context I was out by a dot number. > /opt/rtems/5/bin/X-rtems5-gcc > /opt/rtems/6 (maybe with the new build system) > /opt/rtems/7/bin/X-rtems7-gcc I am looking at the parallel install issue (#3083) and unfortunately a rather complex fix to it I am attempting to find the simplest path into the build system and stumbled across this in cpukit/aclocal/rtems-top.m4: AC_PREFIX_DEFAULT([/opt/rtems-][_RTEMS_API]) Does this need to change to: AC_PREFIX_DEFAULT([/opt/rtems/][_RTEMS_API]) ? Chris [1] https://devel.rtems.org/wiki/Developer/Release#RTEMSRelease5SeriesAndHigherNumbering _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
