From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path:
Received: (qmail 25711 invoked by alias); 3 Oct 2003 22:59:13 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive:
List-Post:
List-Help:
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 25704 invoked from network); 3 Oct 2003 22:59:13 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at) (128.131.111.2)
by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 3 Oct 2003 22:59:13 -0000
Received: from [128.131.111.60] (acrux [128.131.111.60])
by vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Postfix) with ESMTP
id 4BD9113789; Sat, 4 Oct 2003 00:59:12 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 2003 22:59:00 -0000
From: Gerald Pfeifer
To: Mark Mitchell
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: GCC Release Status (2003-10-03)
In-Reply-To: <200310032250.h93Moti1003175@doubledemon.codesourcery.com>
Message-ID:
References: <200310032250.h93Moti1003175@doubledemon.codesourcery.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-SW-Source: 2003-10/txt/msg00120.txt.bz2
On Fri, 3 Oct 2003, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> There are still a lot of open 3.3.2 regressions: 69 at last count,
> which is down from 96 the last time I sent a status report.
> [...]
> There are 150 bugs targeted for GCC 3.4 (up from 143); 46 are C++ bugs
> (up from 44).
Comparing numbers, GCC 3.4 seems in surprisingly good shape (or GCC 3.3
in relatively bad shape). What's your feeling?
Gerald
PS: I applied the patch below to our main page.
Index: index.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/index.html,v
retrieving revision 1.397
diff -u -3 -p -r1.397 index.html
--- index.html 22 Sep 2003 09:41:01 -0000 1.397
+++ index.html 3 Oct 2003 22:56:39 -0000
@@ -71,7 +71,7 @@ to maintain and improve quality.
Release status:
- 2003-09-05
+ 2003-10-03