This is the mail archive of the 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: GCC 4.5 Status Report (2009-09-19)

On Sun, 20 Sep 2009, Steven Bosscher wrote:

> On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 10:57 PM, Richard Guenther <> wrote:
> > Since the last status report we have merged the VTA branch and pieces
> > of the LTO branch. ?The named address-spaces changes are still pending
> > review but I expect it to be merged before the end of Stage 1.
> > The rest of the LTO branch will be merged last, which practically
> > means after Stage 1 is over. ?Thus, starting Oct 1st the trunk will
> > be frozen for the LTO merge and I'll announce Stage 3 once the merge
> > is completed.
> Is there a set of release criteria for all these major new features?
> For example:
> * testsuite for C/C++/Fortran should pass with LTO
> * idem with WHOPR?

Worthwhile goals.  It mostly does.

> * GDB test suite should pass with -O1

Which GDB version?

> * SPEC should pass with graphite
> * ...

There will be bugs in new features, but not merging them will not
make you know them.  The premise is of course that a new feature
is usable within documented constraints.

> Also, IMHO a new requirement should be added for merging big new
> features: Update changes.html.

Yes.  Well, updating changes.html before the release.  Note that
changes.html is for user visible changes - that may or may not apply
for VTA (we don't document every new command-line flag in changes.html).

> As usual for the last, say, 4
> releases, most of the interesting new features are not yet described
> in the changes.html for the upcoming release (see

Bugs for omissions are certainly welcome, likewise patches to fix them.


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