GCC Status Report (2005-03-09)

2005-03-09 Thread Mark Mitchell
General === As per previous announcements, please do not place a target milestone on bugs that are not part of the release criteria. For example, since neither Ada nor Java are part of the release criteria, bugs that affect only those languages should never have a target milestone. (It's go

Re: GCC Status Report (2005-03-09)

2005-03-09 Thread Steven Bosscher
On Wednesday 09 March 2005 23:51, Mark Mitchell wrote: > The remaining 1.1 projects include: > > * Autovectorization Enhancements (some parts) Not seen yet. > * SMS Improvements Part 1 of n (n unknown) submitted and unreviewed so far: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-03/msg00681.html > *

Re: GCC Status Report (2005-03-09)

2005-03-09 Thread Greg Schafer
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 02:51:52PM -0800, Mark Mitchell wrote: > As per previous announcements, please do not place a target milestone > on bugs that are not part of the release criteria. Hmm, see below. > 4.0 Status > == > In order to help us hit the April 15th target for GCC 4.0, plea

Re: GCC Status Report (2005-03-09)

2005-03-09 Thread Andrew Pinski
On Mar 9, 2005, at 6:15 PM, Greg Schafer wrote: This is rather critical, yet a bugmaster saw fit to remove the 4.0.0 target milestone on this bug: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20166 Any chance of making this one a high priority? Of course this is a glibc bug and not really a gcc

Re: GCC Status Report (2005-03-09)

2005-03-09 Thread Diego Novillo
Mark Mitchell wrote: * Structure Aliasing Part I Submitted today. I've started reading it over. Diego.

Re: GCC Status Report (2005-03-09)

2005-03-09 Thread Joe Buck
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 06:18:58PM -0500, Andrew Pinski wrote: > On Mar 9, 2005, at 6:15 PM, Greg Schafer wrote: > > >This is rather critical, yet a bugmaster saw fit to remove the 4.0.0 > >target > >milestone on this bug: > > > > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20166 > > > >Any chan

Re: GCC Status Report (2005-03-09)

2005-03-10 Thread Thorsten Glaser
Mark Mitchell dixit: >4.1 Status >== > >The 4.1 projects Wiki page shows that four projects have been checked >in: Hello etoh-san, do you have a statement about ProPolice for gcc 4? Are you working on it, or even bringing it into mainline (maybe even disabled by default, doesn't matter as

Re: GCC Status Report (2005-03-09)

2005-03-10 Thread Mark Mitchell
Greg Schafer wrote: This is rather critical, yet a bugmaster saw fit to remove the 4.0.0 target milestone on this bug: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20166 Any chance of making this one a high priority? I've restored the target milestone, but I've marked this as low priority. It wo

Re: GCC Status Report (2005-03-09)

2005-03-11 Thread Richard Guenther
On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 19:30:40 -0800, Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Greg Schafer wrote: > > > This is rather critical, yet a bugmaster saw fit to remove the 4.0.0 target > > milestone on this bug: > > > > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20166 > > > > Any chance of making t

Re: GCC Status Report (2005-03-09)

2005-03-11 Thread Richard Guenther
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 10:07:33 +0100, Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 19:30:40 -0800, Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Greg Schafer wrote: > > > > > This is rather critical, yet a bugmaster saw fit to remove the 4.0.0 > > > target > > > milestone on this

Re: GCC Status Report (2005-03-09)

2005-03-11 Thread Florian Weimer
* Joe Buck: > If it is only Debian on non-shipped platforms, it would be reasonable to > ask the Debian x64-64 people to apply the one-line patch to glibc pointed > to by the PR. It could be a hassle for them now because of the sarge > freeze, though, so maybe fixincludes would be the way to go.

Re: GCC Status Report (2005-03-09)

2005-03-13 Thread Dorit Naishlos
> The remaining 1.1 projects include: > > * Autovectorization Enhancements (some parts) > 1.2 Incrementally preserve loop-closed form when vectorizing Submitted today: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-03/msg01318.html 1.3 Improvements to peeling for alignment Submitted today: http://gcc