Mercurial > mplayer.hg

diff DOCS/Polish/gcc-2.96-3.0.html @ 3523:dadab20dc2b4

Find changesets by keywords (author, files, the commit message), revision number or hash, or revset expression.
began updated translation by <nell@skrzynka.pl> (work-in-progress)
author gabucino
date Sun, 16 Dec 2001 11:51:02 +0000
parents
children 69e7f986e506
line wrap: on
line diff
--- /dev/null	Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000
+++ b/DOCS/Polish/gcc-2.96-3.0.html	Sun Dec 16 11:51:02 2001 +0000
@@ -0,0 +1,111 @@
+<HTML>
+<BODY BGCOLOR=WHITE>
+<FONT face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size=2>
+
+<P>
+<B>Question:</B> What is GCC 2.96 ? I can't find it at GNU site.
+</P>
+
+<P>
+<B>Answer:</B> Read the <A HREF="http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-2.96.html">official answer from GNU GCC team.</A>
+</P>
+
+<P>
+<B>Question:</B> What is the problem with GCC 2.96 ? And with 3.x ?
+</P>
+
+<P>
+<B>Answer:</B>
+</P>
+
+<P>
+And for the people, who periodically asks what are the exact problems with
+gcc 2.96, my answer: <I>we don't know exactly.</I> 
+There were various problems and new problems / bugs come up periodically.
+It is <I>not a single bug/problem</I>. We just see various bugreports, mostly
+gcc internal bugs, compiler syntax errors in source or bad code compiled. They
+all are solved using different version of gcc. I understand that gcc 2.96
+has different default optimization flags and they conflicts with our inline
+asm code, but we can't fix them, and we really don't want to fix them as they
+work with other compilers or gcc versions, and the fix may cause speed loss.
+</P>
+
+<P>
+I think that the gcc 2.96 should be fixed to be option-compatible with other
+releases, but redhat guys refused to do it. If someone interested - ask
+Eugene K., avifile author, he has a long mailing with them, because they had
+the same problems with avifile. Finally he changed avifile source to
+<I>workaround</I> gcc 2.96 bugs...
+We simply has no interest and time to do it.
+</P>
+
+<P>
+Ah, and about the pipe-in-comment bug: it wasn't really our bug.
+I've talked one of gcc maintainers, and he told me that gcc 2.96 and 3.x
+supports intel asm syntax, and it caused the pipe bug. But it <I>is</I> a bug,
+because gcc <I>silently</I>, without any warning, ignored the whole asm block!
+</P>
+
+<P>
+Other gcc 3.x problems comes from broken libstdc++ or glibc header (std_*.h)
+installation. They are not our fault. MPlayer compiles and works well with
+gcc 3.x versions. <B>Only 2.96 is broken</B>, but it depends on many environment
+elements, including gcc 2.96 release number, enabled mplayer features, etc.
+<I>If it works for you using gcc 2.96, it doesn't mean it will work for everyone.</I>
+</P>
+
+<P><B>Answer 2:</B></P>
+
+<P>
+Also read <A HREF="users_against_developers.html">this</A> text !!!</P>
+
+<P>
+<B>Question:</B> No! You are wrong! Everything works with gcc 2.96 <I>but</I> MPlayer
+</P>
+
+<P>
+<B>Answer:</B>
+</P>
+
+<P>
+No. You are wrong!
+Several projects (mainly which source contains high optimized inline asm code)
+had problems with gcc 2.96. For example: avifile, MESA / DRI, Wine, ffmpeg, lame.
+But other projects already workarounded gcc bugs (changed code which
+triggered compiler bugs) so they work for now.
+</P>
+
+<P>
+<B>Question:</B> No! You are wrong! Everything works with gcc 2.96 <I>including</I> MPlayer
+</P>
+
+<P>
+<B>Answer:</B>
+</P>
+
+Good. Be happy. But you must know, it depends on many environment
+elements, including gcc 2.96 release number, enabled mplayer features, etc.
+<I>If it works for you using gcc 2.96, it doesn't mean it will work for everyone!</I>
+It only means that you are lucky, until you find a problem. But don't forget the
+<B>No.1 rule of gcc 2.96 users: NEVER REPORT BUGS OR PROBLEMS IF YOU ARE USING GCC 2.96</B>
+
+<P>
+<B>Question:</B> Ok. Understood. But I want to give it a try... how to compile with gcc 2.96?
+</P>
+
+<P>
+<B>Answer:</B> Really? Are you sure? Ok. You know... here is it: ./configure --disable-gcc-checking
+</P>
+
+<P>
+<B>Question:</B> No! I don't agree with you, because ...
+</P>
+
+<P>
+<B>Answer:</B> It doesn't matter. Keep your commets for yourself. We're not interested in gcc 2.96 stories.
+</P>
+
+
+</FONT>
+</BODY>
+</HTML>