Where can I get the source for g++ 2.95.?

[Pep]

I need to get a upgrade to my current FreeBSD g++ compiler (2.95.4) as it
does not support the use of anonymous structures within a union :(

However the latest source I can find on www.gnu.org is for 2.95.3

Is there a place I can get a later version of the package or is that the
last version supported by GNU?

If so then how do I go about getting a upgrade from 2.95.4 for FreeBSD?

Unfortunately going to the version 3 series is not a option.

TIA,
Pep.

[Rolf Magnus]

Pep wrote:

I need to get a upgrade to my current FreeBSD g++ compiler (2.95.4) as it
does not support the use of anonymous structures within a union :(
This is a very old compiler. You should better upgrade to 3.x (for x < 0) or
4.x instead.
However the latest source I can find on www.gnu.org is for 2.95.3
That's because there is no official GCC version between 2.95.3 and 3.0. It's
probably the same as with the infamous GCC 2.96, which is acutally not GCC.
Is there a place I can get a later version of the package or is that the
last version supported by GNU?

If so then how do I go about getting a upgrade from 2.95.4 for FreeBSD?

Unfortunately going to the version 3 series is not a option.

That is quite unfortunate, because that series made a big leap toward
standard compliance and binary compatibility between different version and
with other compilers (using a standard ABI).

[Pep]

Rolf Magnus wrote:

Pep wrote:

I need to get a upgrade to my current FreeBSD g++ compiler (2.95.4) as it
does not support the use of anonymous structures within a union :(

This is a very old compiler. You should better upgrade to 3.x (for x < 0)
or 4.x instead.

However the latest source I can find on www.gnu.org is for 2.95.3

That's because there is no official GCC version between 2.95.3 and 3.0.
It's probably the same as with the infamous GCC 2.96, which is acutally
not GCC.

Is there a place I can get a later version of the package or is that the
last version supported by GNU?

If so then how do I go about getting a upgrade from 2.95.4 for FreeBSD?

Unfortunately going to the version 3 series is not a option.

That is quite unfortunate, because that series made a big leap toward
standard compliance and binary compatibility between different version and
with other compilers (using a standard ABI).

Thanks for the response.

I have google'd extensively since my OP and have found out much of what you
said, so it looks like I have no choice but to try and push the boat out to
a higher version.

I doubt that I can convince my peers that we should move to 4.x but possibly
3.x, though even that is going to be a massive battle. Is there a
regression test suite I can use to prove that we can adopt the newer
version of the compiler in addition to the obvious step of building our
code with the new compiler?

Cheers,
Pep.

[Dave (from the UK)]

Pep wrote:

Rolf Magnus wrote:

Pep wrote:

I need to get a upgrade to my current FreeBSD g++ compiler (2.95.4) as it
does not support the use of anonymous structures within a union :(

<snip>
I doubt that I can convince my peers that we should move to 4.x but possibly
3.x,
Well, if you going to make a jump, you might as well go with the later
ones. Unlike the early gcc 4.x, I think the latest is pretty stable.

Issues of using old tools will only crop up again, but just in less time
if you use an older one now. That is an argument for going with a
later compiler.
though even that is going to be a massive battle. Is there a
regression test suite I can use to prove that we can adopt the newer
version of the compiler in addition to the obvious step of building our
code with the new compiler?

If you could use Linux or Solaris, rather than FreeBSD, then there is
now a good free commercial C++ compiler. It used to be expensive
(several thousand $'s), but is now free, even for commercial use. The
compiler is not however open-source.

http://developers.sun.com/prodtech/cc/products/

You might have less hassles convincing someone the fact you are using a
commercially supported C++ compiler, rather than the latest version of g++.

Sun Studio 11's huge appetite for RAM, processor and swap space is
dramatically reduced if you stick to the command line tools, rather than
the GUI. I've run it on lesser machines than the minimum spec with no
hassle.

The debugger is *excellent*.

If the Linux or Solaris (x86 or SPARC) route is worth considering, you
could ask on comp.unix.solaris for advice about testing. There are lots
of people from Sun who hang out there, including some from the compiler
group. Or phone Sun and ask.

--
Dave K

http://www.southminster-branch-line.org.uk/

Please note my email address changes periodically to avoid spam.
It is always of the form: month-year@domain. Hitting reply will work
for a couple of months only. Later set it manually. The month is
always written in 3 letters (e.g. Jan, not January etc)

[Pep]

Dave (from the UK) wrote:

Pep wrote:

Rolf Magnus wrote:

Pep wrote:
I need to get a upgrade to my current FreeBSD g++ compiler (2.95.4) as
it does not support the use of anonymous structures within a union :(

<snip>

I doubt that I can convince my peers that we should move to 4.x but
possibly 3.x,

Well, if you going to make a jump, you might as well go with the later
ones. Unlike the early gcc 4.x, I think the latest is pretty stable.

Issues of using old tools will only crop up again, but just in less time
if you use an older one now. That is an argument for going with a
later compiler.

though even that is going to be a massive battle. Is there a
regression test suite I can use to prove that we can adopt the newer
version of the compiler in addition to the obvious step of building our
code with the new compiler?

If you could use Linux or Solaris, rather than FreeBSD, then there is
now a good free commercial C++ compiler. It used to be expensive
(several thousand $'s), but is now free, even for commercial use. The
compiler is not however open-source.

http://developers.sun.com/prodtech/cc/products/

You might have less hassles convincing someone the fact you are using a
commercially supported C++ compiler, rather than the latest version of
g++.

Sun Studio 11's huge appetite for RAM, processor and swap space is
dramatically reduced if you stick to the command line tools, rather than
the GUI. I've run it on lesser machines than the minimum spec with no
hassle.

The debugger is *excellent*.

If the Linux or Solaris (x86 or SPARC) route is worth considering, you
could ask on comp.unix.solaris for advice about testing. There are lots
of people from Sun who hang out there, including some from the compiler
group. Or phone Sun and ask.

Thanks for the advice.

Unfortunately moving to Linux is not an option for this project so I need to
stick with gnu's compiler.

As you say it would be better to move to 4.x rather than 3.x however my
peers may not readily agree to this although I might be able to argue a
move to 3.x (weird I know).

Cheers,
Pep.

[Paul Dubuc]

Pep wrote:

As you say it would be better to move to 4.x rather than 3.x however my
peers may not readily agree to this although I might be able to argue a
move to 3.x (weird I know).

Not entirely weird. 3.4.5 is VERY stable. 4.x is only in its 3rd release
(4.0.2). Some 3rd party libraries libraries and debuggers may not work with
4.0.2 yet. You may have to make many little changes to your source to get it
to compile with 3.4.5 (the library and compiler were entirely rewritten after
2.95.3), but the step form there to some future 4.x release should be much
easier. For multithreaded applications you MUST move away from 2.95. It's
worth the effort. The newer versions off GCC are much better than 2.95.

--
Paul M. Dubuc