Re: GCC 4.0.2 Released

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>]

On Fri, Sep 30, 2005 at 10:54:22AM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> Was this a regression from 4.0.0 or 4.0.1?

I doubt it.

> > Personally, I'd do a 4.0.3 based on current bits.
> 
> The problem is that it's not just me banging on the release button
> (which does itself take quite a lot of time, since there's all the
> secondary upload and web-site work to do); it's also going to mean
> freezing the release branch and doing a release candidate with current
> changes, which will further distract from 4.1.
> 
> And, m68k is not a primary platform.
> 
> I think the right metric is: if we hadn't known about this bug before
> 4.0.2 would we be rushing out 4.0.3 right now?  I think in this case the
> answer is clearly no.  I think the Solaris problem is the only one which
> might merit that kind of recation.

*shrug*

Let's let it go then.

I have less faith in the value of the primary/secondary platform
distinction, and no immediate stake in whether the bug is fixed in
4.0.2, since Debian has long since given up using releases rather than
the tip of the release branches.  It's still a platform that people
use.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC