I have no objection to moving to a unified version of gcc on hppa.
gcc-4.8
would be my choice.
On 2-Dec-13, at 7:14 AM, Matthias Klose wrote:
Control: tags -1 + moreinfo
Afaics, the situation didn't change. There is nobody committing to
work on the
toolchain for these architectures. At least for release
architectures the
alternative is to drop the port unless somebody wants to maintain
the toolchain
for this port. This is the current status, please correct me if I'm
wrong.
- alpha, no feedback, CCing Michael Cree.
- hppa, no feedback, CCing John David Anglin
- ia64, no feedback, likely to be removed.
- powerpc, found some feedback from the porters, but unrelated to
toolchain issues, see
https://lists.debian.org/debian-powerpc/2013/11/msg00050.html
- powerpcspe, no feedback, CCing Roland Stigge.
- ppc64, no feedback
- s390x, pending upload
- sparc, no feedback
- sh4, no feedback, doesn't build, CCing Nobuhiro Iwamatsu
Am 01.12.2013 16:45, schrieb Hiroyuki Yamamoto:
Source: gcc-defaults
Version: 1.123
Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch
Please resume considering to change using unified version of gcc,
because FTBFS of many packages occur by e.g. c++11
on ports which stayed using gcc-4.6 and g++-4.6,
ia64, powerpc, s390x, sparc, alpha, powerpcspe, ppc64, sh4.
And using unified version of gcc must bring happiness
to many package maintainers.
On the other hand, I understand that this changing depends on
the correspondence status of gcc porting,
so I leave decision to you.
This is a decision for the porters. If there are no active porters,
there
shouldn't be a port.
Unfortunately, building gcc-4.8 source package on sh4 has not
succeeded yet,
so here is a patch which changes gcc-4.8 using on ports except sh4.
Regards,
Dave
--
John David Anglin dave.ang...@bell.net
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gcc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/blu0-smtp159ef0af22e96a1af4006097...@phx.gbl
