Daniel Jacobowitz writes: > On Sun, Dec 15, 2002 at 09:59:34PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 15, 2002 at 11:16:41PM +0000, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > > > * Daniel Jacobowitz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > > > Reference: http://people.debian.org/~rmurray/c++transition.html, which > > > > seems > > > > to be the latest copy. > > > > > > > > My understanding is that GCC 3.2 now works on all architectures. That > > > > means > > > > we're now past the last big blocker waiting for the transition. Does > > > > anyone > > > > know of anything else holding us up, besides someone to manage the > > > > process? > > > > > > > > If not, it sounds like it's time to begin. > > > > > > I wonder how well tested it is on all architectures? I'd worry about > > > things like exception handling and threading being fully tested on all > > > architectures. > > > > > > When we say "works on all architectures" that means it passes the > > regression tests as expected. That's no trivial thing either. > > Actually, someone needs to find out why the regression tests hang on > m68k.... that's sort of important.
that's simple, m68k is getting better, not many regressions in the testsuite, and then the buildd timeout hits ;-) It should be fixable within 72 hours (the time gcc needs to build on m68k).