GCC - updates

[Paul Smedley]

[U:\DEV\gcc-os2]gcc --version
gcc (GCC) 12.2.0
binaries soon if there's any interest.

I'm interested.

https://smedley.id.au/tmp/gcc-12.2.0-os2-20220820.zip - source is at https://github.com/psmedley/gcc-os2/tree/gcc-12

Feedback appreciated - seems to work as well as 12.1.0 in the tests I've done so far.

[TeLLie]

Hi Paul,

Thankz again for the update, slighty tested it on some programs with cmake, qt5 and make, all where compiling fine.

Where some small programs i tested it with.

Keep up the good work

[Paul Smedley]

Hi Elbert,

Thankz again for the update, slighty tested it on some programs with cmake, qt5 and make, all where compiling fine.

Where some small programs i tested it with.

Keep up the good work

Thanks for testing, and confirming things seem to work.

Cheers,

Paul

[Paul Smedley]

Updated GCC 12.2.0 build, which is compatible with rpm. https://smedley.id.au/tmp/gcc-12.2.0-os2-20230404.zip fixes are mainly to do with adding support for drive letters in cxx11::filesystem to fit some Qt 6.5. issues.

[Paul Smedley]

GCC updated to 12.3.0 - https://smedley.id.au/tmp/gcc-12.3.0-os2-20230513.zip

[KO Myung-Hun]

Hi/2.

I've found a problem of gcc v12.3.0.

If an output name of the executable is not given, gcc generates a.exe. For example,

Code: [Select]

    gcc test.c

This should generates test.exe not a.exe.

Maybe this change is your intention ? Or a regression ?

Thanks for your work!

[Paul Smedley]

I'll try investigate....

[Paul Smedley]

I'll try investigate....

Per https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2024-June/244138.html -  GCC 12.4.0 should be available on Thursday. I'll try investigate as part of the update to 12.4.0

[KO Myung-Hun]

I'm looking forward to it!

[Mentore]

I'm looking forward to it!

Me too!
As soon as I can get back autotools working I'll definitely try it.
Mentore

[Paul Smedley]

Hi/2.

I've found a problem of gcc v12.3.0.

If an output name of the executable is not given, gcc generates a.exe. For example,

Code: [Select]

    gcc test.c

This should generates test.exe not a.exe.

Maybe this change is your intention ? Or a regression ?

Thanks for your work!

So this is interesting -  GCC 9.x worked as you expect, GCC 11 and 12 don't. Interestingly on ubuntu, I get an executable a.out

I'll try investigate,  but compared to getting latest  Samba working, this is  comparatively low  proiority. Expect a lightly tested GCC 12.4.0 soon.

[Dave Yeo]

Getting an executable named a.out is/used to be the way it worked. Even GCC 2.81 on OS/2 produced an a.out without -Zomf. I think it still needed emxbind to actually run on OS/2.

[Paul Smedley]

gcc 12.4.0 intial release is out.... designed to be installed in %unixroot%\usr\local1240 so should play nicely with rpm... just add %unixroot%\usr\local1240\bin to the front of the path..

https://smedley.id.au/tmp/gcc-12.4.0-os2-20240621.zip

Only tested very lightly (ie to make sure it can build itself)

[KO Myung-Hun]

First of all, thanks a lot!

I've done regression test with my own test suites(https://github.com/komh/gcctest). This release passed all tests but it still generates `a.exe'.

Any plan to fix this problem ?

[Paul Smedley]

First of all, thanks a lot!

I've done regression test with my own test suites(https://github.com/komh/gcctest). This release passed all tests but it still generates `a.exe'.

Any plan to fix this problem ?

Thanks for testing...

See my post above this... "I'll try investigate,  but compared to getting latest  Samba working, this is  comparatively low  proiority. Expect a lightly tested GCC 12.4.0 soon."