This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the glibc project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] PowerPC64 port part 2 of 7

From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
To: Tom Gall <tom_gall at vnet dot ibm dot com>
Cc: libc-alpha at sources dot redhat dot com
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 22:06:28 +0200
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PowerPC64 port part 2 of 7
References: <200208191853.g7JIr3I31678@skunk.rchland.ibm.com> <20020819215122.C26639@sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz> <3D613B83.4D8858D@vnet.ibm.com>
Reply-to: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>

On Mon, Aug 19, 2002 at 01:40:03PM -0500, Tom Gall wrote:
> > I don't think it is good to promote gcc 3.1.1 as first version if gcc 3.0
> > or 3.1 had no support for ppc64, as it is ABI incompatible with 3.2.
> > Writing 3.2 is IMHO much better.
> 
> Ummm I suspect you're thinking of g++ ABI incompatibilities, not 'c', least if
> there are
> ABI issues between gcc 3.2 and say 2.95.4 for c, I'd sure like to hear them.

Yes, I'm talking about C++ ABI incompatibilities, but what's the point
in promoting 3.1.1 for powerpc64-*-linux*?

	Jakub

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH] PowerPC64 port part 2 of 7
  - From: Tom Gall

References:
- [PATCH] PowerPC64 port part 2 of 7
  - From: Steven Munroe
- Re: [PATCH] PowerPC64 port part 2 of 7
  - From: Jakub Jelinek
- Re: [PATCH] PowerPC64 port part 2 of 7
  - From: Tom Gall

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