From: Andreas Jaeger <aj@suse.de>
To: obrien@FreeBSD.org
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Is the gcc-3_3-branch creation still on target?
Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2002 09:36:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <u8elb618ry.fsf@gromit.moeb> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20021004150915.GA19779@dragon.nuxi.com> ("David O'Brien"'s message of "Fri, 4 Oct 2002 08:09:15 -0700")
"David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org> writes:
> Are things still on schedule to branch mainline, creating the
> gcc-3_3-branch, on 15-Oct-2002?
>
> FreeBSD 5.0 will use some form of GCC 3.3 snapshot. I know this isn't
> desired by the GCC Steering Committee to have another "gcc 2.96", but
> FreeBSD has little choice. It ICE's on many popular packages, X11 as
> just one example. It has serious optimization bugs for modern x86
> processors, for which the PR's aren't getting fixed. It has regressions
Honza just fixed and verified a few PRs.
Just getting off-topic:
Honza, I noticed you commit them this way:
Thu Oct 3 23:15:15 CEST 2002 Jan Hubicka <jh@suse.cz>
* i386.h (CPP_SPECS): fix defines for -msse, -msse2, -mpentium2,3.
The rule is to mention the PR number so that everybody knows which
report is fixed, in this case the ChangeLog should be:
Thu Oct 3 23:15:15 CEST 2002 Jan Hubicka <jh@suse.cz>
PR c/7242
* i386.h (CPP_SPECS): fix defines for -msse, -msse2, -mpentium2,3.
Can you follow the example please?
Ok, back to your claims: Did you report everything? GCC 3.2 (and
neither current CVS from last week) ICEs on Linux/x86 and Linux/x86-64
while compiling X11 nor on any package that is in the current SuSE
distribution for these platforms. So, please send bug reports that
are reproduceable.
> from 2.95 that aren't getting fixed. All in all, GCC 3.2 is poo. There
> needs to be a balance between adding new features, re-abstracting the
> code, etc; and basic usability. So far the 3.x series has leaned too far
> to the former. GCC 3.1.1 was the most stable of any of the 3.x
> compilers, but it has a broken C++ ABI and is EOL'ed by the GCC
> developers, which makes it a poor choice to base an OS on.
GCC 3.2 is pretty good, e.g. Mandrake, Red Hat and SuSE use it as
basis for their current Linux distribution.
I understand that you want to switch to 3.3 but I would suggest the
following (that's how we have done it at SuSE and I guess Red Hat did
something similar):
- use the current CVS mainline for your work and test everything with it
- report all bugs that you encounter
- integrate regularly (e.g. using the weekly snapshot) the current CVS
version into your system and start from the beginning ;-)
- release FreeBSD 3.0 with the final release of GCC 3.3.
This is quite involved but if you follow the development closely, your
permanent testing will help make GCC 3.3 a suitable compiler for your
environment.
Andreas
--
Andreas Jaeger
SuSE Labs aj@suse.de
private aj@arthur.inka.de
http://www.suse.de/~aj
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-10-04 16:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-10-04 8:23 David O'Brien
2002-10-04 8:50 ` H. J. Lu
2002-10-04 9:29 ` David O'Brien
2002-10-04 9:34 ` H. J. Lu
2002-10-04 9:44 ` David O'Brien
2002-10-04 9:47 ` H. J. Lu
2002-10-04 9:53 ` David O'Brien
2002-10-04 10:02 ` H. J. Lu
2002-10-04 10:23 ` David O'Brien
2002-10-04 10:28 ` Gerald Pfeifer
2002-10-04 10:06 ` Zack Weinberg
2002-10-04 10:25 ` Gerald Pfeifer
2002-10-04 9:36 ` Andreas Jaeger [this message]
2002-10-04 9:46 ` David O'Brien
2002-10-04 10:49 ` Andreas Jaeger
2002-10-04 10:51 ` Jan Hubicka
2002-10-04 11:27 ` Alexander Kabaev
2002-10-04 15:02 ` Richard Henderson
2002-10-04 13:40 ` David O'Brien
2002-10-04 14:31 ` Joseph S. Myers
2002-10-09 1:40 ` David O'Brien
2002-10-09 14:43 ` Joe Buck
2002-10-09 21:04 ` David O'Brien
2002-10-04 10:47 ` Gerald Pfeifer
2002-10-04 10:50 ` Jan Hubicka
2002-10-04 10:58 ` Andreas Jaeger
2002-10-04 11:29 ` Zack Weinberg
2002-10-04 13:47 ` David O'Brien
2002-10-04 15:23 ` Jan Hubicka
2002-10-04 11:18 ` Phil Edwards
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=u8elb618ry.fsf@gromit.moeb \
--to=aj@suse.de \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=obrien@FreeBSD.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).