[gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.1.1 testing/stablization and glibc 2.4
Ryan Hill wrote: > Just an update - I've finished most major desktop stuff for x86 without any > problems. I'm moving onto stuff that's already on the tracker and is fixed in > testing but not stable. Rather than open and track a ton of new bugs, I'd > like > to reopen the original ~arch bugs and request a backport or stabilization at > the > maintainer's discretion. I changed my mind. Reopening these just creates too much random bugspam. --de. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.1.1 testing/stablization and glibc 2.4
(apologies in advance if this goes through twice) Chris Gianelloni wrote: > On Sat, 2006-07-01 at 12:18 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote: >> Should arch testers start working with 4.1.1 then? And do you want bugs to >> block #117482? > Arch testers should contact their architecture's leads or Release > Engineering Architecture Coordinator. As for bug reports, yes. Just an update - I've finished most major desktop stuff for x86 without any problems. I'm moving onto stuff that's already on the tracker and is fixed in testing but not stable. Rather than open and track a ton of new bugs, I'd like to reopen the original ~arch bugs and request a backport or stabilization at the maintainer's discretion. Is this okay, or would people rather get a shiny new bug? Keep in mind there are already 290 bugs on the tracker. Alternatively, would it be better to just start a new tracker bug for stabilization? https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=117482 --de. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.1.1 testing/stablization and glibc 2.4
Chris Gianelloni wrote: > On Sat, 2006-07-01 at 12:18 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote: >> Should arch testers start working with 4.1.1 then? And do you want bugs to >> block #117482? > Arch testers should contact their architecture's leads or Release > Engineering Architecture Coordinator. As for bug reports, yes. Just an update - I've finished most major desktop stuff for x86 without any problems. I'm moving onto stuff that's already on the tracker and is fixed in testing but not stable. Rather than open and track a ton of new bugs, I'd like to reopen the original ~arch bugs and request a backport or stabilization at the maintainer's discretion. Is this okay, or would people rather get a shiny new bug? Keep in mind there are already 290 bugs on the tracker. Alternatively, would it be better to just start a new tracker bug for stabilization? https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=117482 --de. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.1.1 testing/stablization and glibc 2.4
On Sat, 2006-07-01 at 12:18 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote: > Chris Gianelloni wrote: > > OK, guys, I was speaking with vapier earlier about the possibility of > > getting gcc 4.1.1 stable for the 2006.1 release. We've managed to build > > some release media with it, and are planning on doing more testing with > > it. What we really need is for more people to test this on various > > platforms and to get all of the bugs worked out that we can. We're > > already ramping up our release cycle, and would like to get this > > included, so we don't have to wait until 2007 for a release with >= GCC > > 4.1 in it. > > Should arch testers start working with 4.1.1 then? And do you want bugs to > block #117482? Arch testers should contact their architecture's leads or Release Engineering Architecture Coordinator. As for bug reports, yes. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Strategic Lead x86 Architecture Team Games - Developer Gentoo Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
[gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.1.1 testing/stablization and glibc 2.4
Chris Gianelloni wrote: > OK, guys, I was speaking with vapier earlier about the possibility of > getting gcc 4.1.1 stable for the 2006.1 release. We've managed to build > some release media with it, and are planning on doing more testing with > it. What we really need is for more people to test this on various > platforms and to get all of the bugs worked out that we can. We're > already ramping up our release cycle, and would like to get this > included, so we don't have to wait until 2007 for a release with >= GCC > 4.1 in it. Should arch testers start working with 4.1.1 then? And do you want bugs to block #117482? --de. https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=117482 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
