From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13114 invoked by alias); 19 Sep 2009 22:22:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 13100 invoked by uid 22791); 19 Sep 2009 22:22:21 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from cantor2.suse.de (HELO mx2.suse.de) (195.135.220.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sat, 19 Sep 2009 22:22:17 +0000 Received: from relay2.suse.de (mail2.suse.de [195.135.221.8]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A5B079727; Sun, 20 Sep 2009 00:22:15 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2009 22:22:00 -0000 From: Richard Guenther To: Steven Bosscher Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: GCC 4.5 Status Report (2009-09-19) In-Reply-To: <571f6b510909191502h78b4bd49nc9bcec0bb6338b12@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: References: <571f6b510909191502h78b4bd49nc9bcec0bb6338b12@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LNX 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="8323584-731521699-1253398935=:4520" Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2009-09/txt/msg00359.txt.bz2 This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --8323584-731521699-1253398935=:4520 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Content-length: 1656 On Sun, 20 Sep 2009, Steven Bosscher wrote: > On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 10:57 PM, Richard Guenther wrote: > > Since the last status report we have merged the VTA branch and pieces > > of the LTO branch.  The named address-spaces changes are still pending > > review but I expect it to be merged before the end of Stage 1. > > The rest of the LTO branch will be merged last, which practically > > means after Stage 1 is over.  Thus, starting Oct 1st the trunk will > > be frozen for the LTO merge and I'll announce Stage 3 once the merge > > is completed. > > Is there a set of release criteria for all these major new features? > For example: > > * testsuite for C/C++/Fortran should pass with LTO > * idem with WHOPR? Worthwhile goals. It mostly does. > * GDB test suite should pass with -O1 Which GDB version? > * SPEC should pass with graphite > > * ... There will be bugs in new features, but not merging them will not make you know them. The premise is of course that a new feature is usable within documented constraints. > Also, IMHO a new requirement should be added for merging big new > features: Update changes.html. Yes. Well, updating changes.html before the release. Note that changes.html is for user visible changes - that may or may not apply for VTA (we don't document every new command-line flag in changes.html). > As usual for the last, say, 4 > releases, most of the interesting new features are not yet described > in the changes.html for the upcoming release (see > http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.5/changes.html). Bugs for omissions are certainly welcome, likewise patches to fix them. Thanks, Richard. --8323584-731521699-1253398935=:4520--