From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25644 invoked by alias); 19 Jun 2004 02:16:35 -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 25623 invoked from network); 19 Jun 2004 02:16:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nile.gnat.com) (205.232.38.5) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 19 Jun 2004 02:16:33 -0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nile.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F24E4F2D18; Fri, 18 Jun 2004 22:08:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from nile.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (nile.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 07094-01-7; Fri, 18 Jun 2004 22:08:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [216.220.103.157] (sdsl-216-220-103-157.dsl.bway.net [216.220.103.157]) by nile.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7600EF2C0B; Fri, 18 Jun 2004 22:08:33 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <20040618234005.4435.qmail@sourceware.org> References: <20030318040600.10129.bosch@gcc.gnu.org> <20040618234005.4435.qmail@sourceware.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v618) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <90DAA9A2-C195-11D8-BC5F-000A959A128E@gnat.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, Andrew Pinski From: Geert Bosch Subject: Re: [Bug target/10129] [3.4 only] Ada bootstrap fails on PPC-Darwin - invalid assembler emitted - PIC related Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 02:16:00 -0000 To: Mark Mitchell X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at nile.gnat.com X-SW-Source: 2004-06/txt/msg02356.txt.bz2 List-Id: It's really unfortunate as this bug is a regression reported more than a year ago. September last year, the bug had been fixed, but the fix went unreviewed and not approved for 3.3 as "Ada is not release critical". Now the same thing happens with 3.4. What criteria are being used here to accept patches to fix Ada regressions? At 3.4 you said wait for 3.4.1, now you're saying wait until... what time? Basically, the message seems to be that if Geoffrey Keating breaks Ada bootstrap that's fine. However, fixes to restore bootstrapping cannot go in for another two major releases? Please explain. There's a whole lot of difference between bugs being release-critical and refusing to accept fixes to restore bootstrap on a certain target. -Geert On Jun 18, 2004, at 19:40, mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > ------- Additional Comments From mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org > 2004-06-18 23:40 ------- > Ada bugs are not showstoppers. > > -- > What |Removed |Added > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > ----- > Target Milestone|3.4.1 |--- > > > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10129 > > ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- > You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter. > You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. >