This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: 2.95.3 (was Re: Removal of V2 code)
- To: Joe Buck <jbuck at racerx dot synopsys dot com>
- Subject: Re: 2.95.3 (was Re: Removal of V2 code)
- From: Tom Tromey <tromey at cygnus dot com>
- Date: 22 Nov 2000 15:03:36 -0700
- Cc: mark at codesourcery dot com (Mark Mitchell), gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org (GCC Hackers)
- References: <200011220120.RAA19430@racerx.synopsys.com>
- Reply-To: tromey at cygnus dot com
>>>>> "Joe" == Joe Buck <email@example.com> writes:
Joe> Another issue that some on the SC have expressed worries about is
Joe> whether 2.95.3 will cause developers of front ends or back ends
Joe> that haven't been fixed to work with the planned 3.0 changes
Joe> (e.g. new C++ ABI, GC) to lose their motivation to quickly fix
Joe> the problems, meaning that either 3.0 will taken even longer or
Joe> then we'll be asked to support two parallel chains of development
Joe> going forward (2.95.4, etc).
In Java-land we were interested in having 2.95.3 about 6 months ago
when the cvs gcc was regularly broken. However we didn't have
resources to do a full release :-(.
If it came up now I imagine we would just ignore it. We're busy
working on getting everything set for gcc 3.0.
In some ways this would be bad, because the gcc in Red Hat 7.0 has
newer Java support than any hypothetical 2.95.3 would.