X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-ID: <47C45534.A74427F4@dessent.net> Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 10:06:44 -0800 From: Brian Dessent X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Testing gcc 4.2.3 References: <47C45106 DOT 6090300 AT pobox DOT com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com David Arnstein wrote: > This process generated many stack dumps. There were also test suite > failures, not surprising in light of the stack dumps. Finally, my > Windows Application Event Log filled with error messages from Cygwin. They're messages from cygserver, not Cygwin. I can't really see a reason why cygserver would be needed for anything in the gcc testsuite. > I suspect that the failures were due to bash running out of resources, > what do you think? That sounds like BLODA. Many run the testsuite without crashes or running out of resources. There was a handle leak at one point that expect/dejagnu would exercise but that's been fixed for a while. > I would like to know why gcc 4.2.3 is not included in the standard > cygwin distribution. Perhaps the problems I am seeing are not limited to > my peecee? Sigh. You'll have to search the archives. There are a number of things preventing a move to gcc 4.x as the system compiler. The main snags are lack of shared libgcc (which breaks C++ EH with shared libraries) and the everlasting debate about if and how to transition to DW2 EH from SJLJ. Brian -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/