View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
gK Guru
Joined: 31 Jul 2002 Posts: 319 Location: France
|
Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2002 1:31 pm Post subject: About Gentoo 1.4... |
|
|
Hi,
I would like to kown the release date of Gentoo 1.4-stable for several reasons (gcc 3.1 !). It seems that Gentoo 1.4 release about 15 august... Can you confirm ?
Thanks you :)
Last edited by gK on Sat Aug 17, 2002 9:25 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
BonezTheGoon Bodhisattva
Joined: 14 Jun 2002 Posts: 1408 Location: Albuquerque, NM -- birthplace of Microsoft and Gentoo
|
Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2002 1:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That seems to be what Daniel Robbins is saying, check out this other thread!!
Regards,
BonezTheGoon
[edit]Fixed annoying type-error, bleh![/edit]
Last edited by BonezTheGoon on Wed Aug 21, 2002 4:38 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
gK Guru
Joined: 31 Jul 2002 Posts: 319 Location: France
|
Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2002 1:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah :)
M: Speaking of compiling, is there a timeframe for the official move to GCC 3.1?
DR: Yes, we're already at gcc 3.1 but the official release will be at LinuxWorld San Francisco on August 13-15th, 2002.
I'm very impatient to next release. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
therobot Apprentice
Joined: 07 Jun 2002 Posts: 256 Location: Canada
|
Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2002 4:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
the stable release will be 1.4 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
pjp Administrator
Joined: 16 Apr 2002 Posts: 20067
|
Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2002 4:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So official odd numbered releases are developer versions only, or? _________________ Quis separabit? Quo animo? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
fmalabre Guru
Joined: 19 Jun 2002 Posts: 376 Location: Chicago
|
Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2002 5:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Will there be a lot of changes from the 1.3b? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
masseya Bodhisattva
Joined: 17 Apr 2002 Posts: 2602 Location: Baltimore, MD
|
Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2002 10:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
No, probably not. Most of the changes would be made any time you did a emerge -u world. I think most of the 'changes' will be in the iso file that is used to install gentoo. It's not like an official 1.4 release will change a whole lot for someone who has 1.3a or 1.3b installed, unless you have a burning desire to re-install gentoo. _________________ if i never try anything, i never learn anything..
if i never take a risk, i stay where i am.. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
BonezTheGoon Bodhisattva
Joined: 14 Jun 2002 Posts: 1408 Location: Albuquerque, NM -- birthplace of Microsoft and Gentoo
|
Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2002 10:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well one nice thing will be the existance of a 1.4 iso, when I installed 1.3b I made my own bootable CD and used the "loose files" as found in the mirrors for the 1.3b stages.
Regards,
BonezTheGoon |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ehorizon n00b
Joined: 06 Jul 2002 Posts: 1
|
Posted: Thu Aug 01, 2002 2:55 am Post subject: GCC 3.1 or 3.1.1 (3.2) |
|
|
Hope this isn't a stupid question... But... Does anyone know if the 1.4 release will be using gcc 3.1 or 3.1.1 (3.2). I oly ask because I know there are still problems with 3.1 and the pentium 4 optimizations. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
masseya Bodhisattva
Joined: 17 Apr 2002 Posts: 2602 Location: Baltimore, MD
|
Posted: Thu Aug 01, 2002 4:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
I would be willing to bet that it's going to be gcc 3.1. If anything else it will be gcc 3.1.1. I don't think there's much chance that they will use gcc 3.2 for gentoo 1.4, but I'm sure that it will be used when it's more stable for some release in the distant future. _________________ if i never try anything, i never learn anything..
if i never take a risk, i stay where i am.. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Jyrinx Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 03 May 2002 Posts: 92 Location: Carleton College - Northfield, MN
|
Posted: Thu Aug 01, 2002 5:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
It'll be 3.2. This has already been discussed on the GCC3 forum. Remember that 3.2 is just 3.1.1 with C++ ABI fixes. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
pjp Administrator
Joined: 16 Apr 2002 Posts: 20067
|
Posted: Thu Aug 01, 2002 5:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
And that thread would be here. Or, to quote a developer:
verwilst wrote: | Hehe, those assumptions you guys make is fun to read )
Here's the real deal:
Gentoo 1.4 will have gcc 3.2.
I already have a stage1 tarball, but i won't upload it yet, since i'm going to redo it, after we fix a couple of issues before the real work starts.
I'm going to do my best to get Gentoo 1.4 ready for the Expo on the 13th (i think), so stay tuned )
See ya! |
_________________ Quis separabit? Quo animo? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
rommel Veteran
Joined: 19 Apr 2002 Posts: 1145 Location: Williamsburg Virginia
|
Posted: Thu Aug 01, 2002 6:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
both beta releases of redhat (limbo) and mandrake 9.0 are using gcc 3.2 i believe...would think that gentoo would be using it by the time 1.4 is actually released |
|
Back to top |
|
|
masseya Bodhisattva
Joined: 17 Apr 2002 Posts: 2602 Location: Baltimore, MD
|
Posted: Thu Aug 01, 2002 12:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Really? So is gcc 3.2 more stable than 3.1 or 3.1.1? Does gcc operate on a odd number unstable, even number stable system as does the kernel and gentoo? Does it fix a lot of the problems that have occurred with not being able to compile certain software packages? _________________ if i never try anything, i never learn anything..
if i never take a risk, i stay where i am.. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
klieber Bodhisattva
Joined: 17 Apr 2002 Posts: 3657 Location: San Francisco, CA
|
Posted: Thu Aug 01, 2002 12:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
moving to gcc3 forum.
--kurt _________________ The problem with political jokes is that they get elected |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Jyrinx Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 03 May 2002 Posts: 92 Location: Carleton College - Northfield, MN
|
Posted: Thu Aug 01, 2002 10:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't think it's a matter of stability, per se; it just makes C++ interoperability saner, I think.
No, there's no odd/even version scheme, though a new minor release (i.e. the x in 3.x) signals binary incompatibility. This is why a few ABI tweaks mean that 3.1.1 and 3.2 can be nearly the same ... normally they wouldn't do that, but I guess someone was desperate to fix the C++ ABI.
(BTW, the 3.2 release seems to be taking longer than originally stated; anyone know why? Or am I just impatient )
Jyrinx
jyrinx_list@mindspring.com |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Jyrinx Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 03 May 2002 Posts: 92 Location: Carleton College - Northfield, MN
|
Posted: Sat Aug 03, 2002 12:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
To answer my own question: From recent mailing-list posts, it looks like they're worried about discrepancies between the 3.2 and 3.3 ABIs in CVS. Here's to quick resolutions of last-minute concerns ... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
fmalabre Guru
Joined: 19 Jun 2002 Posts: 376 Location: Chicago
|
Posted: Sun Aug 04, 2002 10:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
I read bad stuff about gcc with C++, does gcc 3.2 makes progress for this:
GCC you have to keep a few things in mind. Support for C++ is adequate but not great. The unix world is still primarily driven by C and therefore the tools are more readily available and optimized for C. Although everything builds and works correctly under Linux and Solaris, there are a few things to keep in mind.
Linux itself has no support for exception handling. Throwing an exception in a shared library causes a program to die with a SIGABRT. Because of this QuickFIX must be built statically and linked directly into an executable. This also means you cannot link the C runtime library dynamically. This does not occur on an OS with system-level exception handling (Solaris, Windows).
GCC has pretty poor support for compiling code with templates. It can compile them fine, but it is really slow. It is tolerable with normal optimization, however if you try to use some of the higher optimizations, the build time can become intolerable (and can even eat up all of your machines resources). For this reason, standard optimizations are recommended.
Because GCC isn't particularly optimized for C++ code, and also due to the fact we don't use the higher level optimizations, GCC compiled code tends to be slower than code compiled by some of the commercially available compilers. If you feel you need more performance, you may want to try one of these compilers. If you do this, please run the unit tests and acceptance tests to verify everything works as it should. We only currently do our testing with GCC. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
gK Guru
Joined: 31 Jul 2002 Posts: 319 Location: France
|
Posted: Sat Aug 17, 2002 9:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
brb :)
We are 17th august now... Gentoo 1.4 is not release :/
So, what happenned ? Can you explain me ?
Sorry, but i came back from holidays :) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
klieber Bodhisattva
Joined: 17 Apr 2002 Posts: 3657 Location: San Francisco, CA
|
Posted: Sat Aug 17, 2002 9:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
gK wrote: | So, what happenned ? Can you explain me ? |
It wasn't ready to be released, so it wasn't.
--kurt _________________ The problem with political jokes is that they get elected |
|
Back to top |
|
|
gK Guru
Joined: 31 Jul 2002 Posts: 319 Location: France
|
Posted: Sat Aug 17, 2002 9:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
...ok :)
A (new) release date is foreseen ? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
BonezTheGoon Bodhisattva
Joined: 14 Jun 2002 Posts: 1408 Location: Albuquerque, NM -- birthplace of Microsoft and Gentoo
|
Posted: Sun Aug 18, 2002 12:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
gK wrote: | A (new) release date is foreseen ? |
Check out my little temper-tantrum and the reply in this thread.
Regards,
BonezTheGoon |
|
Back to top |
|
|
gK Guru
Joined: 31 Jul 2002 Posts: 319 Location: France
|
Posted: Sun Aug 18, 2002 9:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Damage :(
Thanks BonezTheGoon ;) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kikawala n00b
Joined: 20 Aug 2002 Posts: 41 Location: Dallas, TX
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Erukian n00b
Joined: 03 Jul 2002 Posts: 50 Location: Tacoma, Washington USA
|
Posted: Wed Aug 21, 2002 3:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I find it to be most likely since the gcc3.2 was pushed back a couple weeks, 1.4 might be too to make up for lost testing.
Gentoo's going to get a lot of publicity with 1.4 using gcc3.2, so I think he's going after quality, with weeks of testing before hand. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|