Re: regression hunt status, question about reports to mailing list

[Wolfgang Bangerth <bangerth at ticam dot utexas dot edu>]

> Should I continue to send mail to gcc@gcc.gnu.org when I identify the
> patch that caused a regression or that fixed a mainline regression that
> still exists on a release branch?  This seemed like a good idea when
> there was one every couple of days, but I'm continuing to discover
> short-cuts that make it faster and easier, so the trickle of mail might
> be getting large enough to be annoying

I think you should. I guess, some nagging is ok, after all we haven't seen 
a rush to fix the regressions for which the offending patch has been 
identified. Yesterday, we had 90 (!) listed regressions, and little 
movement to get them fixed (except for Eric's noticable work on the 
optimization bugs). A little public pressure seems appropriate.

The only thing that worried me once was that there was a discussion on 
gcc@gcc.gnu.org after one of your mails, which is not recorded in the 
database however. But one might add a pointer to this discussion to the 
database.

Apart from that, after my search through the regression list, I am not 
concinced that you will be going on for long with your regression search. 
There don't seem to be so many other reports any more for which this kind 
of search seems appropriate. We need more people with knowledge of the 
internals of the compiler to do something.

To keep things in people's minds, and if the number of regressions does
not decrease noticably, you might want to send a summary by mid-January,
or so.

W.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolfgang Bangerth              email:           bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu
                               www: http://www.ticam.utexas.edu/~bangerth