[llvm-dev] unable to compile llvm with gcc 4.7.4

[via llvm-dev]

On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 04:15:44PM +0100, Renato Golin wrote:
> On 12 October 2016 at 14:34, Teresa Johnson via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> 
> > So I'd first like to understand whether we still want to keep gcc 4.7 as a
> > supported version, or move to 4.8 as was suggested. What is the process for
> > making that change?
> >
> 
> Same as usual: propose on the list, and hope that no one has any blocking
> issues. Going to 4.9 failed because many people had reservations, but IIRC,
> none of those people had reservations against 4.8.
> 
> 
> 
> > If we stick with 4.7 we should have a bot otherwise it will likely stop
> > working again pretty quickly.
> >
> 
> Yes, same for Clang. I suggest we also move to Clang 3.4 as the minimum and
> install a quick bot with that.

Suggestion is not clear answer. How such a decision taken? Is there a board of
people which have to vote to valid the choice of minimal gcc (and clang) version
effective?
Because, currently, the LTO lib caching code (and certainly more as Teresa
Johnson pointed out) should be patched.

If gcc 4.7 (last 1-step C boostrap-able c++-ish compiler) is phased out, then,
to bootstrap llvm from a C compiler/runtime, gcc(4.7.4) + gcc(version>=4.8)
will have to be setup first.

-- 
Sylvain