About Gentoo 1.4...

Message

gK · Post by gK » Wed Jul 31, 2002 1:31 pm

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 :)

Post by **BonezTheGoon** » Wed Jul 31, 2002 1:34 pm

That seems to be what Daniel Robbins is saying, check out this other thread!!

Regards,
BonezTheGoon

[edit]Fixed annoying type-error, bleh![/edit]

gK · Post by gK » Wed Jul 31, 2002 1:40 pm

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.

therobot · Post by **therobot** » Wed Jul 31, 2002 4:11 pm

the stable release will be 1.4

Post by **pjp** » Wed Jul 31, 2002 4:48 pm

So official odd numbered releases are developer versions only, or?

fmalabre · Post by **fmalabre** » Wed Jul 31, 2002 5:30 pm

Will there be a lot of changes from the 1.3b?

Post by **masseya** » Wed Jul 31, 2002 10:19 pm

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.

Post by **BonezTheGoon** » Wed Jul 31, 2002 10:56 pm

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

ehorizon · Post by **ehorizon** » Thu Aug 01, 2002 2:55 am

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.

Post by **masseya** » Thu Aug 01, 2002 4:28 am

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.

Jyrinx · Post by **Jyrinx** » Thu Aug 01, 2002 5:01 am

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.

Post by **pjp** » Thu Aug 01, 2002 5:39 am

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!

rommel · Post by **rommel** » Thu Aug 01, 2002 6:19 am

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

Post by **masseya** » Thu Aug 01, 2002 12:11 pm

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?

Post by **klieber** » Thu Aug 01, 2002 12:29 pm

moving to gcc3 forum.

--kurt

Jyrinx · Post by **Jyrinx** » Thu Aug 01, 2002 10:58 pm

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

Jyrinx · Post by **Jyrinx** » Sat Aug 03, 2002 12:36 am

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

...

fmalabre · Post by **fmalabre** » Sun Aug 04, 2002 10:49 am

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.

gK · Post by gK » Sat Aug 17, 2002 9:25 pm

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 :)

Post by **klieber** » Sat Aug 17, 2002 9:44 pm

gK wrote:So, what happenned ? Can you explain me ?

It wasn't ready to be released, so it wasn't.

--kurt

gK · Post by gK » Sat Aug 17, 2002 9:46 pm

...ok :)

A (new) release date is foreseen ?

Post by **BonezTheGoon** » Sun Aug 18, 2002 12:30 am

gK wrote:A (new) release date is foreseen ?

Check out my little temper-tantrum and the reply in this thread.

Regards,
BonezTheGoon

gK · Post by gK » Sun Aug 18, 2002 9:52 am

Damage :(

Thanks BonezTheGoon ;)

kikawala · Post by **kikawala** » Tue Aug 20, 2002 11:58 pm

Seems like 1.4 is released now...

http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?t=12496

Erukian · Post by **Erukian** » Wed Aug 21, 2002 3:49 pm

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.

About Gentoo 1.4...

About Gentoo 1.4...

GCC 3.1 or 3.1.1 (3.2)

1.4 Released