From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2384 invoked by alias); 23 Jun 2004 22:11:56 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 2374 invoked by alias); 23 Jun 2004 22:11:54 -0000 Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 22:23:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20040623221154.2373.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "wilson at specifixinc dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20040525193213.15653.hjl@lucon.org> References: <20040525193213.15653.hjl@lucon.org> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/15653] [3.4 Regression]: Gcc 3.4 ICE on valid code X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2004-06/txt/msg02979.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From wilson at specifixinc dot com 2004-06-23 22:11 ------- Subject: Re: [3.4 Regression]: Gcc 3.4 ICE on valid code On Mon, 2004-06-21 at 16:08, hjl at lucon dot org wrote: > Gcc 3.4 has many Itanium 1 regressions. I think we should either remove Itanium > 1 support or fix all regressions. I find this very confusing. I assumed that we can not remove Itanium1 support because a) You re-added binutils support after I removed it. b) You are reporting gcc bugs for it. If we really can remove it, then why are you reporting all of these bugs? At the very least, you should mark them as minor problems so I know that they aren't important. The Itanium port has far more problems than there are people to fix them. Every time you report a bug you don't care about, you make this worse. People aren't going to volunteer to fix Itanium bugs just because you report them. All that happens is that you increase my work load. I've been spending time looking at these Itanium1 bug reports because they seemed important to you. Meanwhile, other important bugs are going unfixed. You are only hurting your own cause by diverting my attention from more important problems if you really don't care about the Itanium1 support. Keep in mind that just because it is broken doesn't mean we have to remove it. Removing it is a big hammer. There are easier solutions, such as ignoring the problem for now, or disabling it, or adding an error() call to document that it is broken. If we just leave it alone, maybe someone will volunteer to fix the problems 6 months from now. This won't happen if we just remove it. If we do remove the support, then what exactly are we removing? What about the kernel support? What about the binutils support? Are there other things affected, like glibc? Are we removing all Itanium1 support? Or are we just removing the DFA scheduler for Itanium1? What about people that still have Itanium1 machines? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15653