Re: [boost] [tools] gcc compiler version detection

From: Boris Gubenko (Boris.Gubenko_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-01-08 15:55:02

Sohail Somani wrote:
> Yes that is what I meant. So in these cases, gcc 2.9-hppa-991112 != gcc
> 2.9 vanilla right? Of course, practically it probably makes no
> difference.

I think, in terms of functionality, gcc 2.9-hppa-991112 on HP-UX (or
2.9-gnupro-99r1 on Tru64 for that matter) == 2.9 vanilla: I don't think
that people building the Gnu compiler on a target system make changes to
the compiler code.

I said earlier, that to the best of my knowledge, we do not provide prebuilt
gcc for our platforms. Turns out, my knowledge in this area is incomplete
:-). For Tru64, we provide prebuilt binary on FreeWare CD. For HP-UX, for
some versions of the OS, there is prebuilt package. For other versions, the
customers need to build the compiler from sources. See, for example,
<http://hpux.cs.utah.edu/hppd/answers/4-5.html>. Sorry for the confusion.

Boris

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Sohail Somani" <s.somani_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 3:08 PM
Subject: Re: [boost] [tools] gcc compiler version detection

>> [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Boris Gubenko
>>
>> Sohail Somani wrote:
>> > Nice. I'd guess that those are the ones built by the
>> vendors though no?
>>
>> If you mean building the compiler on a target system as opposite to
>> installing some prebuilt binary, then yes, they are "built by
>> the vendors".
>> "vendors" being HP-UX and Tru64 customers in this case (to
>> the best of my
>> knowledge, we do not provide prebuilt gcc for our platforms).
>
> Yes that is what I meant. So in these cases, gcc 2.9-hppa-991112 != gcc
> 2.9 vanilla right? Of course, practically it probably makes no
> difference.
>
> Sohail
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>
>