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: 3.4 regressions: are 2.95 regressions still actual


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Sat, 24 Jan 2004 17:12:12 -0800, Andrew Pinski <pinskia at physics 
dot uc dot edu> wrote:
> Yes, closing as will not fix for a certain release like 3.3.3 because
> it is not being worked on getting fixed for that release but is
> already fixed for 3.4.
 
I have to admit that this policy did puzzle me quite a bit some time 
ago.  At that time I was still using the released versions of gcc 
(instead of a daily CVS checkout), and I was even using the most recent 
release, not relying on my OS distributor to be up to date.  So I 
encountered a bug, filed a report, and it was promptly closed a few 
hours later with a comment like "cannot be reproduced on the mainline; 
seems to have alreay been fixed."

Which is probably the truth.  But I assumed somehow that, if you make me 
say which version of gcc I use in a bug report, that bugzilla could be 
used to tell which bugs are known in that released version of gcc.  
Sometimes bug reports contain helpful hints, such as tips how to work 
around the bug.  Closing a report means making it basically invisible 
to everybody.  What if someone decides to make another release from the 
release branch, say 3.3.4?  With the bug report closed, it won't stand 
a chance to be fixed.  Even if someone will decide to work on it.

I've seen other projects where bug reports for officially released, 
recent versions are not closed, but are marked as "fixed in 3.4" 
instead.  When the first 3.4 release happens, these bug reports get all 
closed.  That is always a big ego boost, because getting the release 
out means closing quite a few bug reports.  (Hypothetically, one could 
even check whether these bugs actually stayed fixed in the 3.4 branch.)

- -erik
 
- -- 
Erik Schnetter <schnetter@aei.mpg.de>   http://www.aei.mpg.de/~eschnett/

My email is as private as my paper mail.  I therefore support encrypting
and signing email messages.  Get my PGP key from www.keyserver.net.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD4DBQFAE81im3uiSwno3f0RAs95AJYr/eDuOmo87A7sqvBVwisZpl1HAJ9VNS3C
x0a8alVZRnSRzfRlqwKqyA==
=KV8C
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


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