(gcc 2.95 support) kdeextragear-1/amarok/src
hank at bhi.com
Sat Mar 12 17:35:17 GMT 2005
On Thursday 10 March 2005 07:27, Adriaan de Groot wrote:
> On Thursday 10 March 2005 02:04, Max Howell wrote:
> > On Wednesday 09 March 2005 10:39, Adriaan de Groot wrote:
> > > Move function-local class definitions outside of the functions, so
> > > they are module-local. The reason for doing this is that gcc 2.95
> > > barfs during linking with function-local classes with vtables (near
> > > as I can read the error messages).
> > How much longer do we have to support gcc 2.95 for? I must say I have
> > a great deal of distaste that we must make our code more ugly for the
> > sake of an old compiler. I do understand that people want to continue
> > to use it, but I just wonder how much longer they will do so. Thanks,
> Until it is no longer the system compiler on a supported platform. That
> includes Debian stable and FreeBSD 4-STABLE. For the FBSD side, 4.11
> was just released and 4-STABLE is now called "legacy". I believe it
> will be retired in a year. Um, no:
Gcc3 is a supported compiler for FreeBSD-4 for user programs. 2.95 is
the system compiler, but it is trivial to install both. 2.95 is the only
compiler that correctly compiles the kernel/userland. For everything
not FreeBSD you can choose.
I'm running FreeBSD 4-stable on one of my systems, and I've compiled KDE
with gcc3. There are already supported ports in FreeBSD 4 that require
gcc3, so there is precedent.
I'm not on the FreeBSD kde team. I can't say if they want to figure out
the magic needed to have kde compile with gcc3. They can do it though,
so this isn't a critical concern.
Henry Miller hank at bhi.com
More information about the kde-core-devel