From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-164033-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 19924 invoked by alias); 5 Sep 2010 18:23:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 19916 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Sep 2010 18:23:50 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mail-ww0-f46.google.com (HELO mail-ww0-f46.google.com) (74.125.82.46)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 05 Sep 2010 18:23:46 +0000
Received: by wwc33 with SMTP id 33so4399593wwc.15        for <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>; Sun, 05 Sep 2010 11:23:44 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.216.131.161 with SMTP id m33mr2959409wei.13.1283711023931; Sun, 05 Sep 2010 11:23:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.216.164.65 with HTTP; Sun, 5 Sep 2010 11:23:43 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4C83DB83.9080404@codesourcery.com>
References: <4C7D26EA.6020807@codesourcery.com>	<AANLkTi=KDNFoqzzJzCoJRCT0YW8ra1=Nv4CZ9hpV46UL@mail.gmail.com>	<4C83DB83.9080404@codesourcery.com>
Date: Sun, 05 Sep 2010 18:23:00 -0000
Message-ID: <AANLkTimNk+fD9dAVByQZsjYoRCiHd2eLQUnpw=QKjy6T@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: End of GCC 4.6 Stage 1: October 27, 2010
From: NightStrike <nightstrike@gmail.com>
To: Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>
Cc: GCC <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>, "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph@codesourcery.com>, 	Richard Guenther <rguenther@suse.de>, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2010-09/txt/msg00041.txt.bz2

On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 2:03 PM, Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> On 9/4/2010 9:23 PM, NightStrike wrote:
>
>> We would like x86_64-w64-mingw32 to become a secondary target for 4.6.
>
> Who is "we" in this context?

Sorry, that would be Kai Tietz, myself, and the entire mingw-w64.sf.net pro=
ject.

>> What has to be checked off for that to happen?
>
> It's not so much a matter of "checking off". =A0It's a combination of the
> SC's perception of the importance of the target and the technical stats
> of the port. =A0I can raise the issue with the SC, if you like, but,
> personally, I'm not sure that 64-bit Windows is significant enough as a
> target platform for GCC to merit that status.

Ouch.  What criteria do you use for that analysis?  I will endeavor to
prove our importance :)

Note that 32-bit windows is already a secondary platform.