Marius Bakke writes: > Marius Bakke writes: > >> Ludovic Courtès writes: >> >>> Marius Bakke skribis: >>> >>>> Efraim Flashner writes: >>>> >>>>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 09:10:42PM +0200, Marius Bakke wrote: >>>>>> Since we're on the topic, I would like to switch to GCC 6 or 7 soon... >>>>>> Are we agile enough to use the very latest GCC by default yet? :-) >>>>> >>>>> That would be nice to at least move to GCC 6. My aarch64 board is >>>>> currently idle, I can see how well it works on my machine. >>>> >>>> The main issue with GCC 6 is that we need to port the SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH >>>> patches again. But we might want to do that even if switching to 7. >>> >>> I think we should upgrade. My preference would be GCC 6, which I think >>> may trigger fewer build failures than GCC 7, but maybe GCC 7 would be >>> fine. >>> >>> Are you sure the SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH thing isn’t already in GCC 6? >> >> I just checked out the gcc-6_4_0-release tag and ran `git grep >> SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH`. No results :/ >> >> However I tried cherry-picking the two commits and there was only one >> trivial conflict in gcc/c-family/c-common.h (apart from ChangeLog >> updates, which were omitted). Patch attached and building! > > It works! Is it okay to push this GCC-6 SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH patch to 'master'?