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

[Renato Golin via llvm-dev]

Thanks Teresa!

I think the point about having a bot on the minimum version is more
important than bumping the gcc version, that's why I suggested bundling the
clang discussion.

Cheers,
Renato

On 12 Oct 2016 11:52 p.m., "Teresa Johnson" <tejohnson at google.com> wrote:

> I went ahead and started up an RFC thread for bumping the min GCC version
> to 4.8. It seems like moving the minimum Clang version could be proposed
> separately.
>
> Thanks,
> Teresa
>
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 8:15 AM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org>
> 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.
>>
>> cheers,
>> --renato
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Teresa Johnson |  Software Engineer |  tejohnson at google.com |
>  408-460-2413
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20161012/a34e598a/attachment.html>