From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 71826 invoked by alias); 13 Oct 2016 10:07:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 71804 invoked by uid 89); 13 Oct 2016 10:06:59 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=shops, shop, Hx-languages-length:2411 X-HELO: eggs.gnu.org Received: from eggs.gnu.org (HELO eggs.gnu.org) (208.118.235.92) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 10:06:49 +0000 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bucuS-0003y5-Sc for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 06:06:48 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:46175) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bucuS-0003xI-Os; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 06:06:44 -0400 Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:4124 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1bucuQ-0007gf-Tb; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 06:06:43 -0400 Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2016 10:07:00 -0000 Message-Id: <83y41s8swm.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Jan Kratochvil CC: palves@redhat.com, brobecker@adacore.com, markus.t.metzger@intel.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-reply-to: <20161013090647.GA32613@host1.jankratochvil.net> (message from Jan Kratochvil on Thu, 13 Oct 2016 11:06:47 +0200) Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Introduce gdb::unique_ptr Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <4d49eb8f-5a0c-1e7e-d082-1a224179184f@redhat.com> <831szmd977.fsf@gnu.org> <83vawybol4.fsf@gnu.org> <6ba388f7-1696-42db-ae92-23df79e3ba11@redhat.com> <83oa2qaxe7.fsf@gnu.org> <83fuo1c02j.fsf@gnu.org> <20161012114515.GA26977@host1.jankratochvil.net> <831szlbwqt.fsf@gnu.org> <20161013090647.GA32613@host1.jankratochvil.net> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2016-10/txt/msg00347.txt.bz2 > Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2016 11:06:47 +0200 > From: Jan Kratochvil > Cc: palves@redhat.com, brobecker@adacore.com, markus.t.metzger@intel.com, > gdb-patches@sourceware.org > > GCC 4.8.1 has been released in May 2013 so any Linux distributions with at > least annual releases already have it. The only exception are LTS > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-term_support > distributions: > > {RHEL,CentOS}-5.0: gcc-4.1.1-52.el5 > But there is Developer Toolset 2.1 compatible with RHEL-5 which provides: > devtoolset-2-gcc-4.8.2-15.el5 > DevToolset 2.1 is still available in RHN channel for RHEL-5 customers. > Unfortunately it is currently unavailable for CentOS-5 users, hopefully it > will become available soon on this URL but I sure cannot guarantee anything: > https://www.softwarecollections.org/en/scls/?search=toolset > > {RHEL,CentOS}-6.0: gcc-4.4.4-13.el6 > There is DevToolset available in RHN channel and for CentOS it is freely at: > https://www.softwarecollections.org/en/scls/rhscl/devtoolset-4/ > http://mirror.centos.org/centos/6/sclo/x86_64/rh/devtoolset-4/devtoolset-4-gcc-5.2.1-2.2.el6.x86_64.rpm > > {RHEL,CentOS}-7.0: gcc-4.8.2-16.el7 "Available" doesn't mean "installed". Places which use RHEL are IME extremely conservative in upgrading policies, and might not upgrade without a good reason. The shop where I get my paycheck is one such place. > Then there are systems without package management - like MS-Windows - where > all the recent compilers are available installable into separate > subdirectories. That depends. Mingw.org has only 5.3.0 as the latest offering, and recently enough (a few months ago) it only had 4.9.3. So please be very careful when you make assumptions about how widespread a certain compiler version is in n on-Posix world. Like I said before: upgrading the system compiler is a serious decision. Installing a newer compiler could easily break the build of several important packages, which then requires an avalanche of upgrading across the board, just to get those package to build again. That is why many shops which want stable environments and need to continue supporting existing products don't bother upgrading the compiler and the core libraries, unless someone pays for that. Personal machines are most probably another matter, but I don't think we should extrapolate from them.