> While preparing gcc-3.1 packages I noticed many eh-related regressions > fixed in the trunk, when dwarf2 support was added. With Dave's > guidance I made a diff of the pa subdirectory from the trunk and > applied it to the branch. Although many FAILS are gone, there are some > new (diff below).
In general, option b has much better c++ results than a). The c++ test results are essentially identical to those with 3.2. However, compared to the results that I have been posting for 3.2, we have the following new failures: gcc.c-torture/execute/ieee/rbug.c g77.f-torture/execute/19990313-[0-3].f 20_util/allocator_members.cc execution test 22_locale/codecvt_members_char_char.cc execution test 22_locale/codecvt_members_wchar_t_char.cc execution test 22_locale/ctor_copy_dtor.cc execution test 22_locale/ctype_members_wchar_t.cc execution test 27_io/ostream_inserter_arith.cc execution test It would probably be useful to compare test results for b and c. It may be that some of the above are glibc or system problems. I am fairly certain c will build on all platforms. However, I know that there is one c regression under hppa near the beginning of march. There is another at the beginning of May. As a matter of release philosophy, I don't much like hybrids. Option b adds another permutation to maintain even if the new c++ capabilities are very tempting. My focus will be 3.2. 3.1 will only get small bug fixes. If we keep to the main releases, it much easier to verify and resolve bugs. So, I would say use a as the default. This is the conservative choice and well tested across a broad range of systems. Option a can easily be used to build c. Maybe you could include c as well for experimental development and building c++ packages that need the dw2 support under parisc-linux. > I would like to get feedback, on which alternative to base the gcc-3.1 > packages: > > a) 3.1 as to be released (without dwarf2 support) > b) 3.1 + dwarf2 support > c) 3.2 CVS 20020429 plus/minus patches > > Constraints: Make gcc-3.1 the default compiler for all Debian > architectures in the near future, provided it builds on all of them. > > a) is the default option to go with. Dave -- J. David Anglin [EMAIL PROTECTED] National Research Council of Canada (613) 990-0752 (FAX: 952-6605) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]