Get the news first on OSNews: The long-awaited “stable” and recommended for full use, GCC 3.1, is finally released. Get it from Gnu’s ftp site, while the mirrors are not fully updated yet. Update: And the release is now official. You heard it first, here, on OSNews. Again.
GCC 3.1 Released
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Let the benchmark galore begin!
This is all well and good, but if I recall, parts of arts for KDE didn’t compile under gcc 3.0.x. Will this still be the case?
Further, if we upgrade the compiler, and then compile some new programs with it, will these new programs still link to libraries compiled with an older gcc? Will this only affect c++ programs (since the abi is still being polished). Will this require that all libraries be recompiled?
I’d like to know what I’m getting into, if I decide to upgrade.
> if I recall, parts of arts for KDE didn’t compile under gcc 3.0.x. Will this still be the case?
Possibly yes. GCC 3.1 (as well as ICC) has better compliance for C++, it is not its fault if the KDE developers are writting broken C++.
Hi,
IMHO the file on ftp://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/gcc/gcc-3.1/ must be
a pre-release. There is NOTHING mentioned on the gcc
website, and I’m also following the gcc mailing list.
In fact, they are telling the opposite!
Moreover there are at least 4 bugs (PR6631, PR6613, PR6545
and PR5907 to be fixed until gcc-3.1 will be released!)
There is also no announcement (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-announce/2002/)!
So please do not post such stupid articles if you don’t
know what you’re talking about …
greetings
> So please do not post such stupid articles if you don’t
know what you’re talking about…
You can go and shove it where you know.
Don’t freaking play with my nerves, I am not in the mood, ok?
So, this is the final release of GCC 3.1, according to the mailing list (which I follow closely lately). They haven’t announced it yet, because not all the mirrors have pick up the files yet.
The pre-release of GCC 3.1 was marked as such, and it was available in the main directory of the FTP site. This release has its own directory (only the final releases have their own directories), created today.
According to all these clues, and to Mark Mitchell’s schedule as he mentioned some days ago, this is the final version of GCC 3.1
And next time, let us know your name. There is no reason to hide behind your anonymity, afraid that you are probably mistaken anyway..
Oh, and leave some spaces around the URLs in order to parse correctly. Either be a bit careful with your urls, or no more such comments will be authorized for publication.
Answers:
> This is all well and good, but if I recall, parts of arts
> for KDE didn’t compile under gcc 3.0.x. Will this still
> be the case?
Unfortunately I don’t know. It depends on the artsd
developers as a guy posted before.
> […]
Depends (most likely Yes), Yes and Yes.
The API in 2.x and 3.0 has changed, and it has changed
again in 3.1 (just a little bit, but enough to break c++).
You should be able to link against most/all plain C libraries compiled with older gccs.
The C++ in gcc-3.1 is much better that 3.0 and of course
2.x. It also has better support for PowerPC, Java (GJC)
and provides slightly better optimization in most cases
than 3.0. Moreover Ada (GNATs) is now part of gcc
If you want to use C++, Obective-C or Java, you should
definitely upgrade when 3.1 is released.
Well, when is it released. It is NOT release yet. This
announcement is a hoax. The published gcc-3.1.tar.gz is
just a pre-release! It still some serious bugs
(which might not occur on your machine, but who knows!)
greetings, earthling!
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2002-05/msg00900.html
The files I am linking, are not in the root or snapshots directory. They were created today, under its own directory, and only full final releases have their own directories. Also, that fellow said in the list today that they will announce the release when all the mirrors will get the files in that dir.
So, keep your mouth shut before YOU know better.
Regardless if this is the final release or not, it would be nice to give the GCC people a chance to announce the release when they are ready. As mentioned, this release hasn’t had a chance to make it to mirror sites, and they may not be able to handle a ton of download traffic themselves.
Slashdot was heavily criticized for the same sort of thing recently with the KDE v3.0 release, which may be why this story hasn’t made it to their site yet.
Having the scoop first is nice, but there’s also something to be said for responsible reporting.
I highly doubt that the number of OSNews readers wanting to download GCC will take down the Gnu ftp site.
I wonder if RedHat, SuSE and Mandrake had awaited more (say some mounths) for this version of gcc and started to work their latest distros with it ? (giving their users better compiled software programs).
Until now, this (new ?) Linux distros did not get good reviews. Bad timing for finishing a distribution !
That is why Debian gets some credit, right ?
Having the scoop first is nice, but there’s also something to be said for responsible reporting.
Well said.
They should just link http://www.slashdot.org to http://www.osnews.com, all the computer-related stuff anyway
If I was in Eugneia’s shoes right now, I would be in the process of banning IPs and requiring usernames/password to post here. I would eliminate any usernames/passwords which were critical of me and prevent new registrations for a while.
I would do this until people realized that this was my site, and that if you have nothing to offer besides whining, you can do your whining somewhere else. Like Slashdot.
– Sam
The (hopefully final) GCC 3.1 prerelease is now available
in the “snapshots” directory on the ftp server; these are the files with
“20020510” in their name. (Yes, it is no longer that day anywhere
on earth; there was a local network outage that kept the files from
reaching the FTP server faster.)
An email is an announcement.
I think somebody owe’s Eugenia an apology.
C’mon man just face it. You were wrong and you had no basis for you accusations, now just say those two words (I’m sorry) and redeem yourself.
I just built GCC 3.0.4 for Linux on an Athlon not long ago… oh well…
I think the person may have been overly rude, as most people are these days, but, there was a valid point lying hidden amongst the slander. It is truly not fair to the maintainers of gcc to release information for general public consumption, before they want it to be. Granted, it is an opensource project, they did mention it on a public news group, and, as Eugenia said, I doubt the anouncement would cause the GNU ftp server to crawl to its knees.
I do think it is in poor taste. I will think twice about letting any OSNews staff know about any product releases I may have in the future. I would think others would as well. I also think Eugenia has done a very good job with OSNews, as I visit the site multiple times per day. However, I know how hard it is to work on open source projects, with thousands of people pouncing on your blood, sweat and tears free offering (man, am I a bleeding hear. plus look, I got to use blood twice in this comment (just watched From Hell)).
I could just be over reacting as well. But look, I’m not being an ass about it.
GCC’s homepage has now the news that GCC 3.1 is out.
ummmm, does it compile the linux kernel already? last time i heard, gcc3 series cant.
If anyone gives Eugenia shit ever again about articles posted and/or gramatical errors will be visited by Ouchie the Clown wielding a baseball batt with a rusty nail through it.
Good night. Sleep tight. Dont let the bed bug paralize.
>ummmm, does it compile the linux kernel already? last time i >heard, gcc3 series cant.
I am using a Kernel that is build via GCC 3.0.4 in a few test machines. No problem at all.
Compiled KDE3 as well (but need some hacking).
My current (linux) kernel is compiled with 3.0.4, I think I started building my kernel with gcc3 at about 3.0.2 or 3.0.3
I haven’t had ANY problems! I figured I’d have some weird crashes from it or something but nada!
If I was in Eugneia’s shoes right now, I would be in the process of banning IPs and requiring usernames/ password to post here. I would eliminate any usernames/passwords which were critical of me and prevent new registrations for a while.
Why? This is the price of having a public site. You will always have critisism, just don’t let it bother you.
To be honest, I don’t know which I dislike more, the cretinous post or the temper-induced response. I don’t know if this makes sense or not, but personally, I expect the maintainer of the site to be the level-headed maintainer of the nice atmosphere of the site. When Eugenia jumps into the brawl as well, it kind of ruins the whole experience for me. I like intelligent points of view on technical subjects; even when they differ. I don’t like all-star post wrestling.
My advice would be this. Eugenia, there are a lot of people that visit your site that like and respect you. Some don’t. Be happy with that. It’s better than what most people have. When somebody attacks you in a post, ignore it. There is power and majesty in having respect from a mass of people. By igoring the ignoramouses, you show you’re above them and your respect remains untarnished.
I guess what I’m trying to say in a nutshell, when you jump into a fray, you’re bound to come out dirty.
I think somebody owe’s Eugenia an apology.
There are lots of people that owe Eugenia an apology. No one ever seems to apologize tho.
That was very well said! Voltaire once said something like: “I may not like your opinion but i will defend your right to express it as hard as i possibly can!” I guess most of you are americans so you’re propably familiar with the freedom of speach rights which are such vital parts of your constitution. That is one of the beauties of your country!
Best regards mr. schmuck
man you guys, really need to take a break or two.
Who cares about a freaking compiler release, let alone its date.
/whatever
> ummmm, does it compile the linux kernel already? last time i heard, gcc3 series cant
3.0.4 was capable to compile the kernel (albeit I never compiled a kernel with 3.0.4). I think 3.1 is too.
Now I hope Terra Soft has no excuse to not release GCC 3.1 for YDL 🙂
Who cares about a freaking compiler release, let alone its date.
I care, for one.
I’m working on porting a well-known accounting application to Linux & BSD – which I will be doing for free, since the company does not want to invest money in Linux & BSD (yet they have a native Mac OSX version!).
I want to have it running faster than the Windows version, so I had been looking at the $1000US licensing for ICC. Now I have an alternative to look at.
As someone has already said: “Roll on the benchmarks!”
>man you guys, really need to take a break or two.
>
>Who cares about a freaking compiler release, let alone its date.
>
>/whatever
Well… if you are like us who likes to compile things from source, a new compile release *is* a very big news!
Anyway, already running a few kernels (1 P3 and 1 Athlon) using the 3.1 to build. No problem so far…
It was addressed to the ones argueing about the compiler release date and getting personal about it, that was a pitty and unnecessary.
I think we all care, to some extent.