Notice to 3.2.3 release manager (a.k.a Gaby), RE pre2

[Loren James Rittle <rittle at latour dot rsch dot comm dot mot dot com>]

Hi Joe,

> I think that it would be fine to treat 4.8 as the primary reference
> platform, since it's the current stable release.  The primary platform
> list says 4.5, but it was done back before the 3.1 release, so it's
> out of date.

I concur.  I have commited a patch to the 3.3 primary platform
criteria page (there was none for 3.2).  Instead of naming an exact
numeric release, I wrote "-STABLE/-CURRENT" since that is what
actually gets tested every day.

i386-unknown-freebsd4.8 has now completed bootstrap/check/install of pre2.
alpha-unknown-freebsd5.0 has now completed bootstrap/check/install of pre2.

Hi Gaby,

>>  I've started the process for pre2.  [...]

Here is a primary platform report (only the FreeBSD4/i386 port is so
listed but it was easy to do FreeBSD/alpha at the same time).  Status:
functionality-wise we are good-to-go on this platform.  Tested against
dejagnu framework before install only, thus I didn't test any aspects
of performance or real-world tests.  Tested 'gmake install' and then
spot-checked the installed compiler.

I have bootstrapped the 04-16-2003 tarball (all languages, save ada)
which you put up for testing and analyzed the test results on:

i386-unknown-freebsd4.8 "with srcdir configuration, system binutils, GNU make"

    http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2003-01/msg01313.html (3.2.2)
    http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2003-04/msg00891.html (pre1)
    http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2003-04/msg01179.html (pre2)

    No regressions; zero real failures, save documented libjava issues.

alpha-unknown-freebsd5.0 "with objdir configuration, system binutils, GNU make"

    http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2003-01/msg01311.html (3.2.2)
    http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2003-04/msg00888.html (pre1)
    http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2003-04/msg01177.html (pre2)

    All of these regressions appear related to the fact that C99
    support is now enabled when libstdc++-v3 is configured on this
    port (due to libc upgrade, not any change in libstdc++-v3):

    +FAIL: 26_numerics/c99_classification_macros_c.cc (test for excess errors)
    +FAIL: 27_io/ostream_inserter_arith.cc execution test
    +FAIL: "all g++ test cases compiled with -ansi"

    Mostly harmless.  Due to timing, no patch will be forthcoming for
    the 3.2.X branch (although I think I finally understand how
    to create a near-zero risk patch, my track record for breaking...)

Regards,
Loren