> From: Mark Mitchell
> Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 12:00 PM
>
> Now that GCC 4.0 is out the door, I've spent some time looking at the
> status of the 3.4 branch. As stated previously, I'll be doing a 3.4.4
> release, and then turning the branch over to Gaby, to focus
> exclusively on 4.0/4.1.
Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Richard Guenther wrote:
| > On 4/29/05, Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| >
| >>Joseph S. Myers wrote:
| >>
| >>>What's the position on closing 3.4 regression bugs which are fixed in 4.0
| >>>and where it doesn't seem worthwhile to attempt to ba
Richard Guenther wrote:
On 4/29/05, Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Joseph S. Myers wrote:
What's the position on closing 3.4 regression bugs which are fixed in 4.0
and where it doesn't seem worthwhile to attempt to backport a fix?
They should be closed as FIXED, with a note. It would be
On 4/29/05, Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> > What's the position on closing 3.4 regression bugs which are fixed in 4.0
> > and where it doesn't seem worthwhile to attempt to backport a fix?
>
> They should be closed as FIXED, with a note. It would be wrong to
Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Now that GCC 4.0 is out the door, I've spent some time looking at the
| status of the 3.4 branch. As stated previously, I'll be doing a 3.4.4
| release, and then turning the branch over to Gaby, to focus
| exclusively on 4.0/4.1.
I'm happy to help the
On Apr 29, 2005, at 5:33 PM, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
Mark Mitchell dixit:
In general, GCC 3.4.3 is working for people
Does anyone have an idea where to look?
This is a bug in your config, you forgot to define NO_IMPLICIT_EXTERN_C.
-- Pinski
Joseph S. Myers wrote:
What's the position on closing 3.4 regression bugs which are fixed in 4.0
and where it doesn't seem worthwhile to attempt to backport a fix?
They should be closed as FIXED, with a note. It would be wrong to use
WONTFIX, since the bug is in fact FIXED in 4.0; it might make
What's the position on closing 3.4 regression bugs which are fixed in 4.0
and where it doesn't seem worthwhile to attempt to backport a fix? I'm
thinking in particular of issues relating to c-decl.c (1, 18799,
18935, 19694) since c-decl.c in 3.4 was part way through a rewrite and
that inte
Mark Mitchell dixit:
>In general, GCC 3.4.3 is working for people
I've been playing around a lot with the various 3.4.4 snapshots
lately, and got everything to work, except for libjava:
gmake[1]: Entering directory `/usr/obj/gcc/libjava'
/bin/ksh ./libtool --tag=CXX --mode=compile c++ -DHAVE_CON
Now that GCC 4.0 is out the door, I've spent some time looking at the
status of the 3.4 branch. As stated previously, I'll be doing a 3.4.4
release, and then turning the branch over to Gaby, to focus
exclusively on 4.0/4.1.
The 3.4 branch is in pretty good shape, despite what Bugzilla might
lea
10 matches
Mail list logo
