[PATCH] tcmode-default: Set gcc 5.2 as the default

[PATCH] tcmode-default: Set gcc 5.2 as the default

[Richard Purdie]

gcc 5.2 is now working in all the places we test it in, its been in
testing for quite some time. Time to make it the default (we have some
room in M4 for any other bugfixes). Its easy to switch back to 4.9, we
should really remove 4.8 at this point (to meta-oe?).

Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>

diff --git a/meta/conf/distro/include/tcmode-default.inc b/meta/conf/distro/include/tcmode-default.inc
index fabd347..f34cd22 100644
--- a/meta/conf/distro/include/tcmode-default.inc
+++ b/meta/conf/distro/include/tcmode-default.inc
@@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/${TARGET_PREFIX}libc-initial = "${TCLIBC}-initial"
 PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/nativesdk-${SDK_PREFIX}libc-initial = "nativesdk-${TCLIBC}-initial"
 PREFERRED_PROVIDER_virtual/gettext ??= "gettext"
 
-GCCVERSION ?= "4.9%"
+GCCVERSION ?= "5.2%"
 SDKGCCVERSION ?= "${GCCVERSION}"
 BINUVERSION ?= "2.25%"
 GDBVERSION ?= "7.9%"

Re: [PATCH] tcmode-default: Set gcc 5.2 as the default

[Khem Raj]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 260 bytes --]


> On Sep 4, 2015, at 8:27 AM, Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> 
> -GCCVERSION ?= "4.9%"
> +GCCVERSION ?= "5.2%"

a small nit. Make it 5.% to logically indicate that 5.x is a bug fix release and next big upgrade will be
6.x

[-- Attachment #2: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 211 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] tcmode-default: Set gcc 5.2 as the default

[Burton, Ross]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 401 bytes --]

On 4 September 2015 at 16:29, Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> wrote:

> a small nit. Make it 5.% to logically indicate that 5.x is a bug fix
> release and next big upgrade will be
> 6.x
>

To be honest I'd prefer *any* change to the compiler beyond eg 5.2.0 ->
5.2.1 to be explicit.  I think we've all seen enough breakage from a "bug
fix" release to know that it needs a proper test.

Ross

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 825 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] tcmode-default: Set gcc 5.2 as the default

[Khem Raj]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 654 bytes --]


> On Sep 4, 2015, at 8:32 AM, Burton, Ross <ross.burton@intel.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> On 4 September 2015 at 16:29, Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com <mailto:raj.khem@gmail.com>> wrote:
> a small nit. Make it 5.% to logically indicate that 5.x is a bug fix release and next big upgrade will be
> 6.x
> 
> To be honest I'd prefer *any* change to the compiler beyond eg 5.2.0 -> 5.2.1 to be explicit.  I think we've all seen enough breakage from a "bug fix" release to know that it needs a proper test.
> 

well to put it in simple way gcc has changes its release numbers so

4.9.x  is same as 5.x now ( bug fix release) . Does that help

> Ross


[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 1713 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 211 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] tcmode-default: Set gcc 5.2 as the default

[Richard Purdie]

On Fri, 2015-09-04 at 08:29 -0700, Khem Raj wrote:
> > On Sep 4, 2015, at 8:27 AM, Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > 
> > -GCCVERSION ?= "4.9%"
> > +GCCVERSION ?= "5.2%"
> 
> a small nit. Make it 5.% to logically indicate that 5.x is a bug fix release and next big upgrade will be
> 6.x

I'm not sure this would be a good idea. We have had 4.8 alongside 4.9
and can imagine doing something like that with newer 5.x releases
depending on how they work out. I doubt 5.2% hurts anything, apart from
needing to tweak that file slightly more often...

Cheers,

Richard

Re: [PATCH] tcmode-default: Set gcc 5.2 as the default

[Martin Jansa]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1222 bytes --]

On Fri, Sep 04, 2015 at 04:33:20PM +0100, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-09-04 at 08:29 -0700, Khem Raj wrote:
> > > On Sep 4, 2015, at 8:27 AM, Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > > 
> > > -GCCVERSION ?= "4.9%"
> > > +GCCVERSION ?= "5.2%"
> > 
> > a small nit. Make it 5.% to logically indicate that 5.x is a bug fix release and next big upgrade will be
> > 6.x
> 
> I'm not sure this would be a good idea. We have had 4.8 alongside 4.9
> and can imagine doing something like that with newer 5.x releases
> depending on how they work out. I doubt 5.2% hurts anything, apart from
> needing to tweak that file slightly more often...

But that was before GCC changed versioning scheme in 5, see
"Version Numbering Scheme for GCC 5 and Up" section in
https://gcc.gnu.org/develop.html

Having 5.1 alongside 5.2 isn't the same as 4.8 alongside 4.9 was.

I agree with Khem.

Ross: I agree that even small point release has to be tested, but this
variable is useful only to have multiple versions alongside each other,
which shouldn't be the case for 5.1 and 5.2 (or even 5.2.0 and 5.2.1 in
your example).

-- 
Martin 'JaMa' Jansa     jabber: Martin.Jansa@gmail.com

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 188 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] tcmode-default: Set gcc 5.2 as the default

[Khem Raj]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1117 bytes --]


> On Sep 4, 2015, at 8:33 AM, Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 2015-09-04 at 08:29 -0700, Khem Raj wrote:
>>> On Sep 4, 2015, at 8:27 AM, Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>> -GCCVERSION ?= "4.9%"
>>> +GCCVERSION ?= "5.2%"
>> 
>> a small nit. Make it 5.% to logically indicate that 5.x is a bug fix release and next big upgrade will be
>> 6.x
> 
> I'm not sure this would be a good idea. We have had 4.8 alongside 4.9
> and can imagine doing something like that with newer 5.x releases
> depending on how they work out. I doubt 5.2% hurts anything, apart from
> needing to tweak that file slightly more often…
> 

I was asking so that it gets to people that 5.1 and 5.2 are not major release anymore instead 5.x and 6.x
will be major release in future. So there will never be 5.2 and 5.3 simultaneously existing but 5.2 and 6.0 might. So it just reflects the upstream release model change. We can always change the minor as well there is no other technical advantage of using 5.%


> Cheers,
> 
> Richard
> 
> 
> 


[-- Attachment #2: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 211 bytes --]