GCC 3.0 release criteria suggestion. Call for cc0 buildhosts (like m68k and VAX).

[Mark Mitchell]

I hear where you're coming from.

I don't think this is a suitable addition to the release requirements
for two reasons:

  - It's late in the game.

  - That there aren't any cc0 machines among the major platforms 
    means that cc0 machines don't matter too much in this context.
    The platforms were chosen to be representative of the user-base,
    especially the GNU project user-base -- not to be representative
    of various GCC internals.

I don't want to hold up GCC 3.0 on major platforms because of issues
on minor platforms.

I have no objection to adding one of these machines as a secondary
target if people think that there are a lot of users for it.  On the
other hand, remember that the release will not necessarily be held up
for secondary targets -- even if they are rather broken.

That said, fixing cc0 machines (through either of the approaches you
mention) is definitely a good thing.

Thanks,
	
--
Mark Mitchell                   mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC               http://www.codesourcery.com