https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34062
--- Comment #6 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> --- > Regardless of how the project chooses to classify this — whether as a > security defect or a stability issue — we believe the underlying enforcement > gap that Alan described in comment #2 is worth addressing, as it affects > users who may not be aware that IA-64 backend code is active in their builds. But almost any change made to a complex software has the potential to introduce issues that were not present before it; given that the IA-64 back-end gets essentially no testing in the wild nowadays because the architecture is dead, fixing this problem that no human being has noticed in two decades could end up breaking the back-end without anyone noticing. Obsolete software should be left dying in peace instead of being fed to fuzzers without proper consideration. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
