[MAJOR BUG] g++ 2.95.x generates invalid code for KDE 3.3.0
l.savernik at aon.at
Sun Sep 19 18:50:22 BST 2004
Am Sonntag, 19. September 2004 18:55 schrieb Thiago Macieira:
> Well, a few weeks ago, we told Jarosław Staniek that we would not support a
> broken version of MSVC++ and that he should upgrade his compiler to one
> with less known bugs.
I read it, and I find the decision unfortunate, given the widespread use of
msvc6. However, as win32 is a new port, the prerequisites have yet to be
On the other hand, gcc-2.95 has been supported by KDE for ages, and one could
always count on it. Changing prerequisites later on always causes pains.
> >Well, if gcc 3.4 were discovered to generate invalid code tomorrow, nobody
> >would demand its demise, but silently work around it.
> No, we would. We would tell people to stop using gcc 3.4.2 because it
> produces invalid code and instead upgrade to 3.4.3.
> Hence my recommendation: upgrade to gcc 2.95.5 assuming such a version
> comes about. If not, deliberately using a compiler that produces invalid
> code is not the programmer's responsibility.
Upgrading gcc from an older 3.x (where x >= 2) to a newer one is only half the
pain because of the -fabi switch.
> Therefore, even with the fix going in now, I *DO NOT* vouch for my code (or
> any other code, for that matter) working on g++ 2.95.x anymore.
But are you still going to fix issues if they are brought to your attention.
Nothing more can be expected from KDE developers anyway.
> >Given that you have already determined a workaround, and the emerge of
> > this kind of bug is now known, nothing keeps up from ongoing support of
> > gcc-2.95.
> Please read the commit message: "this introduces a behaviour change and a
> bug where previously there were none". I hardly think that's the ideal fix.
I've just read it. I thought it could have been fixed more seamless.
> gcc 2.95 is almost five years old. Support for it has to be dropped
> somewhere along the line. I am proposing that it happens on KDE 4, so
> people will still have yet another year to upgrade. (KDE 3.4 should still
> compile on it)
Agreed for KDE 3.4.
Otherwise, I'm sure this subject will creep up in time for KDE 4.0 again ;-)
> Or do we still support gcc 2.7.x and 2.8.x as well?
We only don't because Qt doesn't. I think all Qt prerequites should also apply
to KDE (particularly for Linux).
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the kde-core-devel