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