This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: some remarks about gcc4.0


tbptbp@gmail.com (tbp)  wrote on 06.01.05 in <4fc48eb1050106054418166b55@mail.gmail.com>:

> On Thu, 6 Jan 2005 14:28:30 +0100 (CET), Steven Bosscher
> <stevenb@suse.de> wrote:
> > Oh but you are.
> I plead guilty.
>
> > Even if it doesn't say it's high priority in bugzilla, that doesn't
> > mean there isn't anyone interested in fixing it.  Apparently Uros is
> > already on it.
> Yes but i cheated, he was aware of it from the start:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-01/msg00176.html
>
> But my concern wasn't that this particular bug got fixed sometime but
> how the still-brittle-x86-SSE code gen. would affect (or not) gcc4.0
> release; i must say that i'm particularly ignorant of gcc release
> protocol.

Bug reports play a serious parts in the process. Typically both developers  
and the release manager repeatedly spend some time looking through  
bugzilla for remaining problems. Problems without bug reports have a high  
probability of being forgotten.

For more info, see http://gcc.gnu.org/, under "Active development  
(mainline):" / "Branch status:" (currently points to http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/ 
gcc/2004-12/msg00958.html) - that is the current status report by the  
release manager.

MfG Kai


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]