Yaakov (Cygwin/X) writes:
> * gcc4-* are replaced by upgrade helpers for gcc-* 4.7.
I did a completely fresh installation of Cygwin for a colleague today
and it broke due to missing gcc-4 and g++-4 links (since it hadn't been
upgraded). It was easily fixed, but I think the current package needs
t
Charles Wilson writes:
> I'll roll a new release of the mingw(.org) toolchain in the next
> week.
I've compiled setup.exe with the mingw toolchain without any errors and
I have not found any executable from the mingw toolchain that actually
links against the libmpc1 library. Maybe I didn't look c
On 7/3/2013 12:04 PM, Achim Gratz wrote:
Yaakov (Cygwin/X) writes:
I can't test it myself at the moment, but I believe that mingw-gcc is
now broken due to its dependency on libmpc1. As a stopgap measure we
could provide a libmpc1 package that copies libmpc3, otherwise a new
mingw-gcc would ha
Yaakov (Cygwin/X) writes:
> * gcc-mingw-* 3.x (-mno-cygwin support files) are replaced by upgrade
> helpers for mingw-gcc-*.
>
> * All curr/prev/test tags are removed from
> gmp/mpfr/mpclib/ppl/isl/cloog-ppl/cloog-isl, making the latest
> versions current.
I can't test it myself at the moment, but
On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 06:10:48PM -0500, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
>On 2013-06-30 14:03, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
>> On 2013-06-29 06:03, JonY wrote:
>>> The upload should be complete last week.
>>
>> OK, I'm planning to take care of the upgrade tonight.
>
>It's done now:
>
>* gcc-4.7.3-1 is stable
On 2013-06-30 14:03, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
On 2013-06-29 06:03, JonY wrote:
The upload should be complete last week.
OK, I'm planning to take care of the upgrade tonight.
It's done now:
* gcc-4.7.3-1 is stable; 4.5.3-3 is previous (renamed from gcc4-* to
gcc-* for simplicity).
* gcc-*
On 2013-06-29 06:03, JonY wrote:
The upload should be complete last week.
OK, I'm planning to take care of the upgrade tonight.
Yaakov
Il 6/29/2013 1:30 PM, JonY ha scritto:
On 6/29/2013 19:10, marco atzeri wrote:
Isn't that in the home directory?
I would say yes
I see, FileZilla client probably likes to use pwd or realpath $PWD to
find the working dir.
I prefer a simple
scp -r CUnit matzeri(at)sourceware.org:CUn
On 6/29/2013 19:10, marco atzeri wrote:
> Il 6/29/2013 1:03 PM, JonY ha scritto:
>> On 6/20/2013 13:46, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 06:18:23AM +0800, JonY wrote:
On 6/19/2013 07:39, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> On 2013-06-18 17:32, JonY wrote:
>> On 6/19/2013 06
Il 6/29/2013 1:03 PM, JonY ha scritto:
On 6/20/2013 13:46, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 06:18:23AM +0800, JonY wrote:
On 6/19/2013 07:39, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
On 2013-06-18 17:32, JonY wrote:
On 6/19/2013 06:17, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
As for the logistics, how abou
On 6/20/2013 13:46, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 06:18:23AM +0800, JonY wrote:
>> On 6/19/2013 07:39, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
>>> On 2013-06-18 17:32, JonY wrote:
On 6/19/2013 06:17, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> As for the logistics, how about you put this in a tempor
On 6/24/2013 13:44, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> On 2013-06-19 18:15, JonY wrote:
>> I see, should have uploaded the earlier version from your cygport. I am
>> uploading it now and should take a day or so to complete. Hopefully, my
>> internet connection doesn't die when I'm away.
>
> Ping?
>
Hi,
On 2013-06-19 18:15, JonY wrote:
I see, should have uploaded the earlier version from your cygport. I am
uploading it now and should take a day or so to complete. Hopefully, my
internet connection doesn't die when I'm away.
Ping?
Yaakov
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 06:18:23AM +0800, JonY wrote:
>On 6/19/2013 07:39, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
>> On 2013-06-18 17:32, JonY wrote:
>>> On 6/19/2013 06:17, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
As for the logistics, how about you put this in a temporary location
(not under release) that I can acce
On 6/20/2013 06:47, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> On 2013-06-19 17:18, JonY wrote:
>> I still build gcc with the -4 suffix, but it no longer does the gcc
>> alternative switch. The next version should remove those.
>
> That's not going to work. With the -4 suffix but without the symlinks,
> this wil
On 2013-06-19 17:18, JonY wrote:
I still build gcc with the -4 suffix, but it no longer does the gcc
alternative switch. The next version should remove those.
That's not going to work. With the -4 suffix but without the symlinks,
this will never be found as *the* gcc/g++/etc. We have already
On 6/19/2013 07:39, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> On 2013-06-18 17:32, JonY wrote:
>> On 6/19/2013 06:17, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
>>> As for the logistics, how about you put this in a temporary location
>>> (not under release) that I can access, and then I can deal with all the
>>> necessary transiti
On 2013-06-18 17:32, JonY wrote:
On 6/19/2013 06:17, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
As for the logistics, how about you put this in a temporary location
(not under release) that I can access, and then I can deal with all the
necessary transitioning.
Where do I put the files at? /sourceware/cygwin-gc
On 6/19/2013 06:17, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
>
> As for the logistics, how about you put this in a temporary location
> (not under release) that I can access, and then I can deal with all the
> necessary transitioning.
>
Where do I put the files at? /sourceware/cygwin-gcc/ sounds OK?
signatu
On 2013-06-17 17:21, JonY wrote:
For the record, here are the deps stated by cygport:
gcc requires: gcc-core gcc-g++
gcc-core requires: bash libcloog0 libgcc1 libgmp3 libgomp1 libiconv2 libintl8
libmpc3 libmpfr4 libppl_c4 libquadmath0 libssp0 zlib0 binutils w32api-headers
w32api-runtime
gcc-
On Jun 18 21:51, JonY wrote:
> On 6/18/2013 19:27, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >
> > Whom are you asking? Not me, I hope. If so, whatever you guys think is
> > right, is right, as long as gcc just works and the Cygwin DLL builds.
> > As a sidepoint, you won't get as much testing as you like as lon
JonY writes:
> All the new ppl/mpc/mpfr/gmp that were marked experimental needs to be
> switched to stable at the same time gcc-4.7.x or else gcc would be
> broken for awhile without those DLLs.
When do you plan to roll a new gcc package? I would want to re-compile
these with 4.7.3 just to be sur
On 6/18/2013 19:27, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>
> Whom are you asking? Not me, I hope. If so, whatever you guys think is
> right, is right, as long as gcc just works and the Cygwin DLL builds.
> As a sidepoint, you won't get as much testing as you like as long as the
> stuff is in "test". Most pe
On Jun 18 18:38, JonY wrote:
> On 6/18/2013 06:21, JonY wrote:
> >>
> >> Sounds doable? Alternatively, the current experimental gcc 4.7.2 and its
> >> dep be made stable before 4.7.3 is pushed, after all, I did use 4.7.2 to
> >> build the new gcc, it is stable enough.
> >>
> >
> > Doable?
> >
>
On 6/18/2013 06:21, JonY wrote:
>>
>> Sounds doable? Alternatively, the current experimental gcc 4.7.2 and its
>> dep be made stable before 4.7.3 is pushed, after all, I did use 4.7.2 to
>> build the new gcc, it is stable enough.
>>
>
> Doable?
>
Hey, can you guys decide? I'll be off in a few da
On 6/17/2013 06:24, JonY wrote:
Oops, sorry dropped the list.
> On 6/17/2013 00:48, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
>> On 2013-06-16 06:48, JonY wrote:
>>> I noticed some deps are still marked as experimental, eg
>>> cloog/ppl/mpc/mpfr/gmp. Parts of the experimental ppl even requires
>>> experimental 4.
On Jun 17 10:26, marco atzeri wrote:
> Il 6/17/2013 7:32 AM, Christopher Faylor ha scritto:
> >On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 11:49:44AM -0500, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> >>On 2013-06-16 09:56, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >>>I thought that Dave Korn was back and supporting gcc. Did that change?
> >>
> >>
Il 6/17/2013 7:32 AM, Christopher Faylor ha scritto:
On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 11:49:44AM -0500, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
On 2013-06-16 09:56, Christopher Faylor wrote:
I thought that Dave Korn was back and supporting gcc. Did that change?
http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2013-06/msg00079.html
On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 11:49:44AM -0500, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
>On 2013-06-16 09:56, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> I thought that Dave Korn was back and supporting gcc. Did that change?
>
>http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2013-06/msg00079.html
So, the answer is: No.
cgf
On 2013-06-16 09:56, Christopher Faylor wrote:
I thought that Dave Korn was back and supporting gcc. Did that change?
http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2013-06/msg00079.html
Yaakov
On 2013-06-16 06:48, JonY wrote:
I noticed some deps are still marked as experimental, eg
cloog/ppl/mpc/mpfr/gmp. Parts of the experimental ppl even requires
experimental 4.7.x libstdc++.
For gcc-4.7, we need the test versions of all those deps.
setup constantly tries to revert it to stable v
JonY writes:
> I noticed some deps are still marked as experimental, eg
> cloog/ppl/mpc/mpfr/gmp. Parts of the experimental ppl even requires
> experimental 4.7.x libstdc++.
That's because gcc-4.5.3 stops working when these packages get
installed.
> setup constantly tries to revert it to stable v
On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 07:48:55PM +0800, JonY wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I noticed some deps are still marked as experimental, eg
>cloog/ppl/mpc/mpfr/gmp. Parts of the experimental ppl even requires
>experimental 4.7.x libstdc++. setup constantly tries to revert it to
>stable versions.
>
>Should I still put g
Hi,
I noticed some deps are still marked as experimental, eg
cloog/ppl/mpc/mpfr/gmp. Parts of the experimental ppl even requires
experimental 4.7.x libstdc++. setup constantly tries to revert it to
stable versions.
Should I still put gcc 4.7.3-1 as experimental?
signature.asc
Description: Open
34 matches
Mail list logo
