Minimum GCC version for building glibc
Mike Frysinger
vapier@gentoo.org
Tue Nov 4 16:58:00 GMT 2014
On 31 Oct 2014 14:03, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> Currently the minimum GCC version for building glibc is 4.4. I propose
> that we increase this to either 4.6 or 4.7. (Release branches before 4.8
> are no longer maintained, but I don't propose 4.8 as a minimum.)
4.8 is way too recent imo at this time.
> If we require at least 4.7 that means various C11 features are available,
> and __atomic_* (as discussed, we may not want to use __atomic_* on all
> architectures, but with 4.7 __atomic_* will be available for use when
> desired). Whatever version we choose, __GNUC_PREREQ conditionals in
> non-installed files not shared with gnulib or other projects would be
> removed if no longer relevant with the new minimum requirement.
>
> Questions:
>
> * Should 4.6 or 4.7 be the minimum?
i tend to prefer to maintain older compatibility when possible. gcc-4.7 was
released in Mar 2012. when we drop support for older versions, i think a
prerequisite should be: what does dropping the older version gain us ? when i
look at the body of code using __GNUC_PREREQ, i see very few hits for <4.7.
you mentioned that we might want to use __atomic_* for some arches. so if we
aren't requiring 4.7, what's the diff between 4.4 and 4.6 ?
> * Should we give a recommendation for a specific version or "X or newer",
> or just specify the minimum without a separate recommendation?
> Experience says the recommendation gets out of date (I don't think 4.6 is
> really likely that widely used for building glibc now), and none of the
> other components come with such a recommendation in install.texi.
it does help indicate to people which versions are heavily tested, but that only
matters if we think people are actually reading the install notes :).
-mike
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://sourceware.org/pipermail/libc-alpha/attachments/20141104/b1f5c314/attachment.sig>
More information about the Libc-alpha
mailing list