[gccsdk] GCC on ROOL compatibility list

At present I'm slowly working through ROOL's ARMv6/v7 compatibility list
and trying to turn it into something which can really be relied on, with
cooperation from software authors wherever possible.

http://www.riscosopen.org/wiki/documentation/show/ARMv6%2Fv7%20software%20compatibility%20list

If you look at that list, you'll see that it's inconsistent - the
sections down as far as 'Graphics' (at present) have been updated into
the new format, with split 'Status' (compatibility) and 'Support'
columns, to accommodate the nuances of individual situations where
software may be compatible but without continuing support, or
compatibility hasn't been confirmed yet but the author will attempt to
fix any such problems reported.

Then the 'Networking' section is in a hybrid format left over from my
early attempt at reworking the page, and the sections below that are in
the original format, dating from the page's days as an ad hoc collection
of notes from informal software testing.

There are two grades of 'compatible' - 'Seems OK', which means nobody's
made it go wrong yet, and the 'ARMv7 OK' logo, which carries the
explicit endorsement of its developers.

The problem with collaborative projects like GCC (currently marked
'Seems OK') is that it's difficult to know who to ask, or indeed if
there is anybody to ask. (The response I got from the NetSurf team was
that "you have just as much right as anyone else to declare it
compatible".) Hence this post.

Even more thorny than the issue of compatibility is the question of
support, as it effectively carries a guarantee that the maintainer(s)
of a given piece of software will be willing to fix any problems
discovered for the forseeable future. As this is quite a commitment, I
always make sure to ask the person responsible for providing such
support for permission before marking their software as 'Supported'.
Again, I have no idea who that may be - or even if the only support that
can be guaranteed is the lesser grade of 'Source Available', meaning
that if something's wrong, you'll probably have to fix it yourself.

So, from someone who feels qualified to answer, would it be OK to change
GCC's status to 'ARMv7 OK' and 'Supported'? Also, which is the earliest
version of GCC which is ARMv7 compatible?

And finally, since I'm not sure where the best place to ask about this
is either, what's the status of the riscos.info packages of ported
software, such as wget, DosBox, etc.? Are they compatible, are they
supported? Is there any way of finding out for a given package who's
responsible for fixing the software?

--
__<^>__
/ _ _ \ You always find something in the last place you look.
( ( |_| ) )
\_> <_/ ======================= Martin Bazley ==========================

_______________________________________________
GCCSDK mailing list gcc@gccsdk.riscos.info
Bugzilla: http://www.riscos.info/bugzilla/index.cgi
List Info: http://www.riscos.info/mailman/listinfo/gcc
Main Page: http://www.riscos.info/index.php/GCCSDK