Bump the minimal version required to compile DMD to 2.076.1

Johan Engelen j at j.nl
Tue Jan 16 22:13:31 UTC 2018


On Tuesday, 16 January 2018 at 18:03:41 UTC, kinke wrote:
> On Tuesday, 16 January 2018 at 13:09:06 UTC, Daniel Kozak wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 12:51 PM, Joakim via Digitalmars-d < 
>> digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Monday, 15 January 2018 at 13:25:26 UTC, Daniel Kozak 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> So why not to use cross compilation?
>>>>
>>>
>>> As I said before, you could do that for the initial port, say 
>>> cross-compiling a build of ldc master for DragonFly by using 
>>> ldc master on linux.  However, from then on, you'd either be 
>>> stuck requiring all your DragonFly users to do the same or 
>>> checking that cross-compiled DragonFly binary into a binary 
>>> package repository somewhere.  I don't think any OS does 
>>> this, as usually the binary packages are all built from 
>>> source.
>>>
>>
>> And this is exactly what many distributions do, so there is 
>> nothing wrong about it. There is no big difference between C++ 
>> compiler or D compiler, you still need to used some existing 
>> binary to build it from source.
>
> Where's the proof? ;)

Indeed.

We shouldn't bump the required dlang version while knowing that 
it will break current distribution packaging. Before bumping the 
dlang version to something that would require more than one 
bootstrap step from C++, let's make sure that the distributions 
that we care about have something set up _already_ that meets the 
new dlang version requirement.

-Johan



More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list