From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2015 23:10:24 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH] gcc: add gcc 5.2.0 In-Reply-To: <55A81B35.2040200@zacarias.com.ar> References: <1437079928-9591-1-git-send-email-gustavo@zacarias.com.ar> <20150716225639.14772165@free-electrons.com> <55A81B35.2040200@zacarias.com.ar> Message-ID: <20150716231024.656693cb@free-electrons.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Dear Gustavo Zacarias, On Thu, 16 Jul 2015 17:59:33 -0300, Gustavo Zacarias wrote: > Yes, i had a little talk with Yann about it and mostly agree. > However the diff is big enough (8 MB bzipped) and 5.2 doesn't build a > bootable kernel for qemu-versatile where 5.1 IIRC does, hence > introducing a regression. Gah, not the sort of thing you would expect from a bug fix release :-/ > Do we still want to step on 5.1 considering this? Then I'm not sure obviously. I see two options here: * Switch to the policy where we support only one 5.x version at a time (option named BR2_GCC_VERSION_5_X), and keep 5.1 for now until 5.3 is released, hopefully fixing the major bugs. * Package gcc 5.2 separately from 5.1. But it's pretty useless to offer as a package a compiler that is not even capable of building a kernel that boots. Opinions? Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com