[Bug target/15653] [3.4 Regression]: Gcc 3.4 ICE on valid code

["wilson at specifixinc dot com" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>]

------- Additional Comments From wilson at specifixinc dot com  2004-06-23 22:11 -------
Subject: Re:  [3.4 Regression]: Gcc 3.4 ICE on valid code

On Mon, 2004-06-21 at 16:08, hjl at lucon dot org wrote:
> Gcc 3.4 has many Itanium 1 regressions. I think we should either remove Itanium
> 1 support or fix all regressions.

I find this very confusing.

I assumed that we can not remove Itanium1 support because
a) You re-added binutils support after I removed it.
b) You are reporting gcc bugs for it.

If we really can remove it, then why are you reporting all of these
bugs?  At the very least, you should mark them as minor problems so I
know that they aren't important.

The Itanium port has far more problems than there are people to fix
them.  Every time you report a bug you don't care about, you make this
worse.  People aren't going to volunteer to fix Itanium bugs just
because you report them.  All that happens is that you increase my work
load.  I've been spending time looking at these Itanium1 bug reports
because they seemed important to you.  Meanwhile, other important bugs
are going unfixed.  You are only hurting your own cause by diverting my
attention from more important problems if you really don't care about
the Itanium1 support.

Keep in mind that just because it is broken doesn't mean we have to
remove it.  Removing it is a big hammer.  There are easier solutions,
such as ignoring the problem for now, or disabling it, or adding an
error() call to document that it is broken.  If we just leave it alone,
maybe someone will volunteer to fix the problems 6 months from now. 
This won't happen if we just remove it.

If we do remove the support, then what exactly are we removing?  What
about the kernel support?  What about the binutils support?  Are there
other things affected, like glibc?  Are we removing all Itanium1
support?  Or are we just removing the DFA scheduler for Itanium1?  What
about people that still have Itanium1 machines?


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15653