On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 02:56:39PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> With gcc-4.9 now available in testing, it is time to prepare for the change of
> the default to 4.9, for a subset of architectures or for all (release)
> architectures. The defaults for the gdc, gccgo, gcj and gnat frontends
> already
> point to 4.9 and are used on all architectures. Issue #746805 tracks the
> gfortran default change, including the change of the Fortran 90 module
> version.
>
> An email a week ago to debian-{release,ports} [1] didn't show any obvious
> blockers, and various test rebuilds don't show at least any internal compiler
> errors anymore.
>
> The Debian archive was rebuilt twice on amd64, once in February, resulting in
> bug submissions for GCC and feedback for the porting guide [2], a second time
> in
> March to file issues for packages failing to build with GCC 4.9 [3]. Another
> test rebuild for mips64 didn't show any additional build failures [4]. Another
> test rebuild for Ubuntu on amd64, i386, armhf, ppc64el didn't show any other
> compiler regressions on these architectures.
>
> I'll work on fixing the build failures in [3], help is of course appreciated.
> Trying to be online on May 16/17 on IRC #debian-toolchain (OFTC) and uploading
> packages to the delayed queue.
>
> Almost all build failures are analysed and should be easy to fix (exceptions
> e.g. #746883). Patches for the ones not caused by the Debian packaging may be
> found in distributions already using GCC 4.9 as the default compiler (e.g.
> Fedora 21).
>
> If anything goes well, and a large amount of build failures are fixed, I plan
> to
> make GCC 4.9 the default for the C/C++/ObjC/Obj-C++ frontends at the end of
> May,
> beginning of June.
>
> Bugs reports for packages building with a legacy version of GCC (4.6, 4.7) are
> filed [5] [6], and will be filed for 4.8 once 4.9 is the default.
There is a gcc 4.8.2 bug that currently prevents iceweasel 29 to build
on armhf, and it appears this bug is fixed in 4.9. Is it fine to build
depend on 4.9?
Mike
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140518091700.ga14...@glandium.org
