Re: GCC 4.5 Status Report (2009-09-19)

[Jack Howarth <howarth at bromo dot med dot uc dot edu>]

On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 10:49:40AM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> > 
> > Now, submitting a one liner as your first attempt@a new pass today
> > and then claiming the rest are just fixes, would be a stretch :-), but
> > for a patch like yours it does not seem unreasonable.
> 
> Just to followup once and answer all the multiple requests that have
> been (and will be) come up - during stage 3 it is up to the respective
> maintainers to decide what is considered a bugfix and whether to allow
> changes to go in that were submitted during stage 1.  The release
> managers trust the maintainers to make stage 3 a success - which means
> mainly fixing fallout from stage 1 or to complete features that have
> been checked in during stage 1.
> 
> Thanks,
> Richard.
> 

Richard,
   Is it safe to assume that with the LTO patches currently
unreviewed, the Oct. 1st deadline for stage 1 will be pushed
back? I ask because Iain is still working on the final patch
to solve PR39888 for darwin. If we in fact miss the transition
to stage 1, can this patch still go into gcc 4.5 since it is
target specific? Allowing it in would have the advantage of
setting the stage for reinstalling...

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-12/msg01259.html

into gcc 4.5 without breaking darwin (since we could
just default on -muse-shared-libgcc-ext for that platform).
Thanks in advance for any clarifications as I am really
hoping some form of...

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18657

can make it into gcc 4.5.
                  Jack