(gcc 2.95 support) kdeextragear-1/amarok/src

Henry Miller 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 mailing list