lang/gcc* package builds vs. release/11.0.1/ and the future release/11.1.0 because of vm_ooffset_t and vm_pindex_t changes and how the lang/gcc* work

[Mark Millard]

On 2017-Jun-29, at 3:10 AM, Gerald Pfeifer <gerald at pfeifer.com> wrote:

> Am 28. Juni 2017 22:38:52 GMT+08:00 schrieb Mark Millard <markmi at dsl-only.net>:
>> A primary test is building lang/gcc5-devel under release/11.0.1
>> and then using it under stable/11 or some draft of release/11.1.0 .
> 
> Thank you, Mark. Let me know how it went. In the meantime I'll prepare the change for gcc5 itself.

I'm not currently set up to run more than head on
any of amd64, powerpc64, powerpc, aarch64, or armv6/7
(which are all I target). And I'm in the middle of
attempting a fairly large jump to head -r320458 on
those. (powerpc 32-bit and 64-bit just failed
for libc++ time-usage compiling now that 32-bit has
64-bit time_t, including in world32/lib32 contexts
for powerpc64.)

It will likely be a while before I manage to have a
11.x context (without losing my head contexts), much
less examples from all "my" 5 TARGET_ARCH's. (Given past
wchar_t type handling problems (e.g.) for gcc targeting
powerpc family members I think it should be checked.)
I'll have to find and set up disks: I do not even have
such handy/ready at the moment.

[I got into this area by being asked questions, not by
my direct use of release/11.0.1 , stable/11 , or a
draft of release/11.1.0 .]

I'll let you know when I have some test results but
others may get some before I do.

> . . .
>> Eventually most of the lang/gcc* 's will need whatever
>> technique is used.
> 
> Yes, agreed. Version 5 is most important since it's the default; then 6; 4.x is for retro computing fans ;-), so 7 will then be next.

[In my normal/head environment I'm switching to lang/gcc7-devel
for gcc (from lang/gcc6 ) but I'm odd that way.]

===
Mark Millard
markmi at dsl-only.net