* GCC 3.3 Status
@ 2003-04-22 23:14 Mark Mitchell
2003-04-23 14:19 ` Jan Hubicka
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Mark Mitchell @ 2003-04-22 23:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc
Cc: rearnshaw, obrien, geoffk, dje, rth, davem, jakub,
joern.rennecke, aoliva, per, apbianco, aph, jh
If you are in the CC list for this email, please read this entire
message.
As of now, we've got 32 high-priority PRs against GCC 3.3.
I'm going to downgrade some of these, including doc issues,
"misleading" (but correct) error messages, etc. In fact, if we do not
get closure quickly, it is my intention (assuming the SC does not
override my decision) to ship 3.3 with virtually *all* of these PRs
unfixed. Very few open 3.3 PRs affect primary targets, and of those
that do, most are ice-on-illegal rather than wrong-code, and of those
that are wrong-code, nobody seems to be making any progress on fixing
them.
I intend to personally tackle most of the remaining C++ issues,
including trying to make a little more progress on the compile-time
issues with respect to inlining, probably by doing the appropriate
double-counting of CLEANUP_STMTs.
Below is a list of PRs that are apparently port-specific, together
with the maintainers for that port. Maintainers, please let me know
that (a) you intend to tackle these PRs in the next few days (by
assigning them to yourself) or at least (b) that you are not going to
try to fix them, by sending mail to me. Please do either (a) or (b)
so that I know what we have a chance to fix and what we do not.
If you choose (b), GCC 3.3 will probably ship without a fix for the
PR.
If you can, please spend a little time to fix up just one PR; if each
port maintainer below does that, we'll nail almost all of them.
It is my intention to make the first GCC 3.3 prerelease in the early
part of next week. The branch will close to patches that do not have
my approval at that time.
Here is the list of open PRs:
Geoff Keating, David Edelsohn:
PR 9745, 10315: PowerPC
Richard Earnshaw:
PR 6860, PR 10206: ARM
David O'Brien, Richard Henderson, David Miller, Jakub Jelinek:
PR 10453: SPARC/FreeBSD
Richard Henderson, David Miller, Jakub Jelinek:
PR 8300, PR 10160: SPARC
Jeff Law:
PR 10021, PR 9812: m68k
Joern Rennecke, Alexandre Oliva:
PR 9594: SH
Richard Henderson:
PR 10308: x86
Per Bothner, Alexandre Petit-Biano, Andrew Haley:
PR 10353: Java
Jan Hubicka:
PR 9929: x86 assigned to you
--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery, LLC
mark@codesourcery.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: GCC 3.3 Status
2003-04-22 23:14 GCC 3.3 Status Mark Mitchell
@ 2003-04-23 14:19 ` Jan Hubicka
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jan Hubicka @ 2003-04-23 14:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mark Mitchell
Cc: gcc, rearnshaw, obrien, geoffk, dje, rth, davem, jakub,
joern.rennecke, aoliva, per, apbianco, aph, jh
>
> If you are in the CC list for this email, please read this entire
> message.
>
> As of now, we've got 32 high-priority PRs against GCC 3.3.
>
> Jan Hubicka:
>
> PR 9929: x86 assigned to you
There is a fix for it waiting in queue. It is bit intrusive, but we do
use it in SuSE compiler for some time with no problems that can be
dirrectly assigned to it.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-04/msg00379.html
an alternative would be do simply prohibit subregs of DImode on 32bit
compilation I sent some time ago too or some other sollution dealing
with the leas differently.
>
> --
> Mark Mitchell
> CodeSourcery, LLC
> mark@codesourcery.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: GCC 3.3 status
2005-04-20 10:56 GCC 3.3 status Giovanni Bajo
@ 2005-04-20 15:21 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Gabriel Dos Reis @ 2005-04-20 15:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Giovanni Bajo; +Cc: gcc
On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Giovanni Bajo wrote:
| Hello Gaby,
|
| do you still confirm the release date which was last reported here:
| http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-01/msg01253.html
|
| that is, will GCC 3.3.6 released on April, 30th? And will it be the last
| release of the GCC 3.3 series?
All those information are right.
More on that later today.
|
| Thanks,
| Giovanni Bajo
|
|
--
Gabriel Dos Reis
gdr@cs.tamu.edu
Texas A&M University -- Computer Science Department
301, Bright Building -- College Station, TX 77843-3112
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* GCC 3.3 status
@ 2005-04-20 10:56 Giovanni Bajo
2005-04-20 15:21 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Giovanni Bajo @ 2005-04-20 10:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Gabriel Dos Reis; +Cc: gcc
Hello Gaby,
do you still confirm the release date which was last reported here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-01/msg01253.html
that is, will GCC 3.3.6 released on April, 30th? And will it be the last
release of the GCC 3.3 series?
Thanks,
Giovanni Bajo
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* RE: GCC 3.3 Status
2003-04-22 23:55 S. Bosscher
@ 2003-04-28 8:14 ` Mark Mitchell
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Mark Mitchell @ 2003-04-28 8:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: S. Bosscher; +Cc: 'gcc@gcc.gnu.org '
On Tue, 2003-04-22 at 16:14, S. Bosscher wrote:
> Mark,
>
> You already have downgraded quite a few PRs, and now you're about to
> downgrade a few more. I think that for 3.3 it is the right decision (heck,
> it's got to go out now, can't wait forever), but is it your intention to
> upgrade those PRs again once 3.3 is released?
For most of them, I'm just taking the 3.3 out of the synopsis; that
pushes them into the 3.4 list. For something like "unclear error
message", I might downgrade the PR to medium priority; I'm not sure that
we'd ever hold up a release for that.
> Many PRs against 3.3 have been simply ignored, or were not recognised as
> regressions, for some time (until Wolfgang started his Great Work of
> analysing all those PRs). Most of them are still present on the trunk. And
> they _are_ regressions, even if everybody agrees that they should not hold
> up 3.3 any longer.
Yes, Wolfgang's contribution has been massive. Truly outstanding. And
yes, we need to try to fix more of these for 3.4.
--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery, LLC
mark@codesourcery.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* RE: GCC 3.3 Status
@ 2003-04-22 23:55 S. Bosscher
2003-04-28 8:14 ` Mark Mitchell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: S. Bosscher @ 2003-04-22 23:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 'Mark Mitchell ', 'gcc@gcc.gnu.org '
Mark,
You already have downgraded quite a few PRs, and now you're about to
downgrade a few more. I think that for 3.3 it is the right decision (heck,
it's got to go out now, can't wait forever), but is it your intention to
upgrade those PRs again once 3.3 is released?
Many PRs against 3.3 have been simply ignored, or were not recognised as
regressions, for some time (until Wolfgang started his Great Work of
analysing all those PRs). Most of them are still present on the trunk. And
they _are_ regressions, even if everybody agrees that they should not hold
up 3.3 any longer.
Greetz
Steven
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Mitchell
To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: rearnshaw@arm.com; obrien@FreeBSD.org; geoffk@geoffk.org;
dje@watson.ibm.com; rth@redhat.com; davem@redhat.com; jakub@redhat.com;
joern.rennecke@superh.com; aoliva@redhat.com; per@bothner.com;
apbianco@redhat.com; aph@redhat.com; jh@suse.cz
Sent: 22-4-03 23:40
Subject: GCC 3.3 Status
If you are in the CC list for this email, please read this entire
message.
As of now, we've got 32 high-priority PRs against GCC 3.3.
I'm going to downgrade some of these, including doc issues,
"misleading" (but correct) error messages, etc. In fact, if we do not
get closure quickly, it is my intention (assuming the SC does not
override my decision) to ship 3.3 with virtually *all* of these PRs
unfixed. Very few open 3.3 PRs affect primary targets, and of those
that do, most are ice-on-illegal rather than wrong-code, and of those
that are wrong-code, nobody seems to be making any progress on fixing
them.
I intend to personally tackle most of the remaining C++ issues,
including trying to make a little more progress on the compile-time
issues with respect to inlining, probably by doing the appropriate
double-counting of CLEANUP_STMTs.
Below is a list of PRs that are apparently port-specific, together
with the maintainers for that port. Maintainers, please let me know
that (a) you intend to tackle these PRs in the next few days (by
assigning them to yourself) or at least (b) that you are not going to
try to fix them, by sending mail to me. Please do either (a) or (b)
so that I know what we have a chance to fix and what we do not.
If you choose (b), GCC 3.3 will probably ship without a fix for the
PR.
If you can, please spend a little time to fix up just one PR; if each
port maintainer below does that, we'll nail almost all of them.
It is my intention to make the first GCC 3.3 prerelease in the early
part of next week. The branch will close to patches that do not have
my approval at that time.
Here is the list of open PRs:
Geoff Keating, David Edelsohn:
PR 9745, 10315: PowerPC
Richard Earnshaw:
PR 6860, PR 10206: ARM
David O'Brien, Richard Henderson, David Miller, Jakub Jelinek:
PR 10453: SPARC/FreeBSD
Richard Henderson, David Miller, Jakub Jelinek:
PR 8300, PR 10160: SPARC
Jeff Law:
PR 10021, PR 9812: m68k
Joern Rennecke, Alexandre Oliva:
PR 9594: SH
Richard Henderson:
PR 10308: x86
Per Bothner, Alexandre Petit-Biano, Andrew Haley:
PR 10353: Java
Jan Hubicka:
PR 9929: x86 assigned to you
--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery, LLC
mark@codesourcery.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2005-04-20 15:12 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2003-04-22 23:14 GCC 3.3 Status Mark Mitchell
2003-04-23 14:19 ` Jan Hubicka
2003-04-22 23:55 S. Bosscher
2003-04-28 8:14 ` Mark Mitchell
2005-04-20 10:56 GCC 3.3 status Giovanni Bajo
2005-04-20 15:21 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
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).