* GCC 3.2.1 -- Request for Bug Fixers @ 2002-10-24 0:36 Mark Mitchell 2002-10-24 0:43 ` Joe Buck ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Mark Mitchell @ 2002-10-24 0:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: bkoz, nickc, rearnsha, jakub, rth; +Cc: gcc We've got about 13 high-priority regressions that we need to fix before GCC 3.2.1 at this point. We've made huge progress over the last week or two; a final push now can put us over the top. Benjamin -- PR 6476 is a libstdc++ issue assigned to you. I know you're figuring out madness what to put in the next version of the C++ library this week, but find some time to nail this PR. :-) Nick, Richard Earnshaw -- PR 7856 is an ARM bug; would one of you take a look? Jakub -- PR 6981 is an x86 bug assigned to you; what is the status? Richard Henderson -- It's not like this is any way really to do with you, but if you had time to look at PR 7944 (a reload crash), that would be way helpful. I will keep banging on the C++ bugs. Getting closer... -- Mark Mitchell mark@codesourcery.com CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: GCC 3.2.1 -- Request for Bug Fixers 2002-10-24 0:36 GCC 3.2.1 -- Request for Bug Fixers Mark Mitchell @ 2002-10-24 0:43 ` Joe Buck 2002-10-24 11:39 ` Joel Sherrill 2002-10-25 6:51 ` Benjamin Kosnik 2002-11-01 7:05 ` Richard Earnshaw 2 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Joe Buck @ 2002-10-24 0:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: mark; +Cc: bkoz, nickc, rearnsha, jakub, rth, gcc > We've got about 13 high-priority regressions that we need to fix > before GCC 3.2.1 at this point. We've made huge progress over the > last week or two; a final push now can put us over the top. Yes, the number has gone down even though we made about six more bugs priority "high" in the last couple of days. The 3.2.1 release note it getting big; I'll hold off on reposting it for a bit since the bug fixes are rolling in. I count 12 definite, and 2 in feedback: 6545 in feedback state since Aug. 7090 it appears that a patch was applied for this one, but it is still in "feedback" state. Any idea about those two, are they real? The other 12 are 5509, 6718, 6746, 6981, 6994, 7228, 7266, 7363, 7385, 7856, 7944, 8067 and the other 12 high-priority PRs only affect the trunk ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: GCC 3.2.1 -- Request for Bug Fixers 2002-10-24 0:43 ` Joe Buck @ 2002-10-24 11:39 ` Joel Sherrill 2002-10-24 15:55 ` Peter Barada 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Joel Sherrill @ 2002-10-24 11:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joe Buck; +Cc: mark, bkoz, nickc, rearnsha, jakub, rth, gcc Joe Buck wrote: > > > We've got about 13 high-priority regressions that we need to fix > > before GCC 3.2.1 at this point. We've made huge progress over the > > last week or two; a final push now can put us over the top. > > Yes, the number has gone down even though we made about six more bugs > priority "high" in the last couple of days. > > The 3.2.1 release note it getting big; I'll hold off on reposting it > for a bit since the bug fixes are rolling in. > > I count 12 definite, and 2 in feedback: > > 6545 in feedback state since Aug. > 7090 it appears that a patch was applied for this one, but it is still > in "feedback" state. > > Any idea about those two, are they real? > > The other 12 are > > 5509, 6718, 6746, 6981, 6994, 7228, 7266, 7363, 7385, 7856, 7944, 8067 > > and the other 12 high-priority PRs only affect the trunk I couldn't file it as high priority and didn't want to bump it up to high until I had a fix for it but I would like to see PR8314 fixed in 3.2.1 and the trunk. Also the bug Pater Barada is tracking down seems to impact a number of m68k/coldfire users (PR8309). If someone could fix that in time for 3.2.1, it would be appreciated. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2002-10/msg01441.html -- Joel Sherrill, Ph.D. Director of Research & Development joel@OARcorp.com On-Line Applications Research Ask me about RTEMS: a free RTOS Huntsville AL 35805 Support Available (256) 722-9985 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: GCC 3.2.1 -- Request for Bug Fixers 2002-10-24 11:39 ` Joel Sherrill @ 2002-10-24 15:55 ` Peter Barada 0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Peter Barada @ 2002-10-24 15:55 UTC (permalink / raw) To: joel.sherrill; +Cc: jbuck, mark, bkoz, nickc, rearnsha, jakub, rth, gcc >Also the bug Pater Barada is tracking down seems to impact a number >of m68k/coldfire users (PR8309). If someone could fix that in time >for 3.2.1, it would be appreciated. > >http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2002-10/msg01441.html I just checked out the trunk and it exhibits this bug. I'm currently pulling out gcc-3_2-branch to see if its there. If not, then I'll binary search the gcc-3_2-branch for when it showed up. -- Peter Barada Peter.Barada@motorola.com Wizard 781-852-2768 (direct) WaveMark Solutions(wholly owned by Motorola) 781-270-0193 (fax) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: GCC 3.2.1 -- Request for Bug Fixers 2002-10-24 0:36 GCC 3.2.1 -- Request for Bug Fixers Mark Mitchell 2002-10-24 0:43 ` Joe Buck @ 2002-10-25 6:51 ` Benjamin Kosnik 2002-11-01 7:05 ` Richard Earnshaw 2 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Benjamin Kosnik @ 2002-10-25 6:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: mark; +Cc: nickc, rearnsha, jakub, rth, gcc >Benjamin -- PR 6476 is a libstdc++ issue assigned to you. I know you're >figuring out madness what to put in the next version of the C++ >library this week, but find some time to nail this PR. :-) I'm on the road for the next couple of days. I'll move this up to high priority, so that as soon as I'm in one place, I'll try to nail it. -benjamin ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: GCC 3.2.1 -- Request for Bug Fixers 2002-10-24 0:36 GCC 3.2.1 -- Request for Bug Fixers Mark Mitchell 2002-10-24 0:43 ` Joe Buck 2002-10-25 6:51 ` Benjamin Kosnik @ 2002-11-01 7:05 ` Richard Earnshaw 2002-11-01 10:40 ` Joe Buck 2 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Richard Earnshaw @ 2002-11-01 7:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: mark; +Cc: nickc, rearnsha, gcc, jbuck > Nick, Richard Earnshaw -- PR 7856 is an ARM bug; would one of you take > a look? Fixed. Joe, could you update your release notes accordingly? R. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: GCC 3.2.1 -- Request for Bug Fixers 2002-11-01 7:05 ` Richard Earnshaw @ 2002-11-01 10:40 ` Joe Buck 2002-11-01 10:48 ` David Edelsohn 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Joe Buck @ 2002-11-01 10:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Richard.Earnshaw; +Cc: mark, nickc, rearnsha, gcc, Joe.Buck > > Nick, Richard Earnshaw -- PR 7856 is an ARM bug; would one of you take > > a look? > > Fixed. Cool! > Joe, could you update your release notes accordingly? I've been trying to add things as we go; there have been 25 (!) bug fixes added to the branch since my last draft release notes post, if I've counted right. We may be reaching the point of diminishing returns; perhaps it's time to do triage on the remaining bugs. I don't see the point of holding up 3.2.1 further to fix every last ICE-on-illegal-code, given the vast number of bug fixes we already have, but there are still a couple of bugs that should be fixed. The bug I'm most worried about at the moment is bootstrap/8362. The audit trail is empty, so I don't know if anyone has looked at it; also I don't know enough about the various powerpc flavors to know how big a disaster it is. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: GCC 3.2.1 -- Request for Bug Fixers 2002-11-01 10:40 ` Joe Buck @ 2002-11-01 10:48 ` David Edelsohn 0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: David Edelsohn @ 2002-11-01 10:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joe Buck; +Cc: Richard.Earnshaw, mark, nickc, rearnsha, gcc, Joe.Buck >>>>> Joe Buck writes: Joe> The bug I'm most worried about at the moment is bootstrap/8362. The Joe> audit trail is empty, so I don't know if anyone has looked at it; also Joe> I don't know enough about the various powerpc flavors to know how big Joe> a disaster it is. I have been looking at it and Daniel Berlin also has been helping. We have not been able to track down where this failure begins. It is unclear whether reload is not replacing all occurances of the pseudo correctly or the pseudo is getting unshared when it should not. I can work around the symptom by tweaking abi_check.cc so that the code eliciting the failure is not built for that target, but this is a pretty serious bug affecting the PowerPC. David ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2002-11-01 18:48 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2002-10-24 0:36 GCC 3.2.1 -- Request for Bug Fixers Mark Mitchell 2002-10-24 0:43 ` Joe Buck 2002-10-24 11:39 ` Joel Sherrill 2002-10-24 15:55 ` Peter Barada 2002-10-25 6:51 ` Benjamin Kosnik 2002-11-01 7:05 ` Richard Earnshaw 2002-11-01 10:40 ` Joe Buck 2002-11-01 10:48 ` David Edelsohn
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).