Rtems 4.8.0 / Mingw / Coldfire Gcc Bug

[ralf.corsepius at rtems.org (Ralf Corsepius)]

On Fri, 2008-02-29 at 09:23 -0600, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > On Fri, 2008-02-29 at 08:14 -0600, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> >   
> >> Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> >>     
> >>> On Fri, 2008-02-29 at 19:54 +1100, Chris Johns wrote:

> >> That isn't much too aim for in a quick 4.8.1, is it? :-D
> >>     
> > Full d'accord. I am not recommending to switch the rtems-4.8 toolchains
> > to gcc-4.3.0.
> >   
> Are you not wanting to ever switch 4.8 to gcc 4.3 or just
> wait until there is a release?
Neither. 

ATM, I think it's too early to give any judgement on gcc-4.3.x. It still
needs to mature and to evolve, as well as RTEMS still needs time to
adopt to it.

That said, my strategy would be to use gcc-4.3.0 with RTEMS development
line (aka rtems-4.9) but to stay with gcc-4.2.x. with RTEMS stable line
(aka rtems-4.8).

If gcc-4.2.x should prove not to be applicable for some situations, or
should gcc-4.3.x prove to be "overwhelmingly better" than gcc-4.2.x [1],
then I'd not be opposed to switch to gcc-4.3.x for one or more targets
even for rtems-4.8.

ATM, I am inclined to classify situation the m68k-gcc-4.2.x as such.

Ralf



[1] Some gcc devs claim so. It definitely is "very different" - better? 
Time will tell.