That's a very simple patch that one of us could apply. But in all
honesty I don't think it makes sense to add sub-releases like this.
The only thing that will fix the problems with gcc 5.x in the long run
is newer version of gf2x and ncurses that can deal with it out of the
box.

In that context I think we should just hit all gcc 5.x releases rather than adding releases as they come out.

Francois

On 07/31/15 06:59, fidelbc wrote:
Hello leif,

I'm using gcc 5.2.0 under ArchLinux. Issues with ncurses and gf2x remain.

I've created and tested a patch (attached) to extend some of the
existing fixes for gcc 5.0 and 5.1.

A post at sage-support [1] might also be relevant.

Best,
Fidel

[1]: https://groups.google.com/d/topic/sage-support/9C-C5LEqf7A/discussion


On Wednesday, April 22, 2015 at 12:11:30 PM UTC-4, leif wrote:

    On 04/22/2015 05:30 AM, leif wrote:
     > Release of GCC 5.1 is scheduled for Wednesday, April 22nd.

    It's out now:

    https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2015-04/msg00287.html


    The errors with ncurses and gf2x remain.  8-/


    -leif


     > I took the first release candidate and tried to build Sage 6.6
    with it:
     >
     >  * MPIR fails in 'configure' -- easy to fix, see #18247
     >
     >  * Lcalc fails to build -- usual C++ issues, subset of those
     >                            with clang, easy to fix, cf. #12437
     >                            ('-fpermissive' also suffices)
     >
     >  * Sage library -- modules using Lcalc headers won't build for the
     >                    same reason (build with '-fpermissive' in
     >                    CFLAGS; distutils ignores CXXFLAGS)
     >
     >  * ncurses (a superfluous package anyway) fails to build with
     >    a syntax error(!) -- apparently a bug in the preprocessor,
     >                         will hopefully vanish with the final;
     >                         setting CPP to use another one works
     >
     >  * gf2x fails in tuning -- results don't agree; presumably (but
     >                            not necessarily) a compiler bug,
     >                            '-O1' fails in the same way, '-O0'
     >                            succeeds; will wait for and retry
     >                            with the final, otherwise probably
     >                            harder to debug
     >
     > After all, all tests (ptestlong) passed (modulo #17907).


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
<mailto:sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
<mailto:sage-devel@googlegroups.com>.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to