Ben Collins writes: > On Tue, Apr 03, 2001 at 01:10:30PM -0500, Gordon Sadler wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 03, 2001 at 12:43:16PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote: > > > For the first time I was able to compile the gcc-3.0 CVS and build glibc > > > 2.2.3pre1 with it on sparc-linux. Even more so, there were no errors > > > from the glibc make check, and the library installed without any > > > problems.
see the thread about gcc bootstraps in March: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2001-03/msg01319.html http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2001-04/msg00036.html > > > What I want to do is upload the current snapshot I have (since I know it > > > to be working) into unstable. Hppa and ia64 require gcc-3.0, and I want > > > to also get started on a libc6-64 for ultrasparc. Seems to be the right time. In http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2001-04/msg00121.html Mark Mitchell asks for more testing: "If people would begin building commonly used programs (XWindows, Emacs, etc.) with the GCC 3.0 branch and reporting any problems, that would be great. I will set up a more formal mechanism for that shortly." Note that at least on ia64 the ABI for exception handling will change. Not sure about the other architectures. > > > Any objections, comments or other patches anyone wants to include? gcc-version.dpatch from 2.95 should be included (include 'Debian' in version string). > > As a daily user/upgrader on unstable, I enjoy being a guinea pig -), I > > would hope that you get feedback from the gcc maintainer(M. Klose?) at a > > minimum, before uploading gcc-3.0 to unstable. > > Matthias has already turned over gcc-3.0 maintainence to a group of > about 9 of us, all on this list, which is why I posted here (which > includes Matthias). Matthias remains maintainer of gcc-2.95, solely. Perhaps we should document this group in the README or in a README.maintainers.