This is the mail archive of the ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the eCos project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: Officially recommended gcc version?


Grant Edwards wrote:
> 
> What's the officially recommended gcc version for building eCos?

"Official" is what you make of it. There's no "official" support, so really
you can do what you want - it's just we do know about some things that
don't work.
 
>   2.95.2 + ecos-gcc-2952.pat
>   2.95.2.1
>   2.95.3
> 
> The web page at http://sources.redhat.com/ecos/tools/linux-arm-elf.html
> shows the first option (2.95.2 + patch).

The patch will be needed on some targets even if you used the 2.95.3 code
base - it includes a few things that were not suitable for 2.95.3. However,
the patch won't apply to 2.95.3 cleanly :-|. I never reworked it for 2.95.3
because 3.0 was so close and I didn't want to retest a whole bunch of
targets. Unless you are hitting a definite obstacle, stick with the first
option. Alternatively if you need 2.95.3 for other reasons you'll have to
resolve the patch conflicts.

I will resolve as many gcc 3.0 issues as I can, and rewrite the build
instructions shortly. This will also include building libstdc++, which I
haven't finished making work with eCos, but I'm nearly there... but that's
one of the reasons for procrastinating.

Jifl
-- 
Red Hat, Rustat House, Clifton Road, Cambridge, UK. Tel: +44 (1223) 271062
Maybe this world is another planet's Hell -Aldous Huxley || Opinions==mine


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]