This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GCC 3.0 Release Criteria
- To: "Martin v. Loewis" <martin at loewis dot home dot cs dot tu-berlin dot de>
- Subject: Re: GCC 3.0 Release Criteria
- From: "Charles M. Hannum" <root at ihack dot net>
- Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 02:39:32 -0400 (EDT)
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
I used to make the (apparently incorrect) assumption that submitting a
bug report with a fix to gcc-bugs was sufficient. Certainly sending a
similar bug report and fix to the bug list for almost any other
project would be, but this apparently is *not* the case with egcs. So
it's possible that things were lost there. And of course anything
ARM-related went through Richard Earnshaw, etc.
But I also note that even things sent to gcc-patches usually entail a
rather long delay, sometimes even with no acknowledgement at all.
> Out of curiosity: Can you please point to specific patches in the
> gcc-patches archives, that should have been installed in a certain
> release, but did not get installed because of Linux?
I forget which patches *specifically*, but I know for a fact that
there were several known and well-tested patches that were important
to NetBSD that did not go in 1.1.2 because it was specifically slated
to support Linux. Particularly ARM-related items that prevented that
GCC port from being at all usable (except that I incorporated the
patches in our own tree). I'm almost certain that I brought up a few
of these on the list, but I don't have time to go search the archives
to find it.