3.3 target date?

[Andreas Jaeger]

Gerald Pfeifer <pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at> writes:

> On Wed, 19 Feb 2003, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
>> Our testing at SuSE showed that 3.3 is in a pretty good shape.
>
> That's interesting, because we still have 77 regressions in 3.3 listed
> in GNATS:
> [...]

Those 77 regressions are sometimes also against GCC 3.2, about 25 are
unique to 3.3 - but I fear more testing will show more ;-).

> And some 26 regressions in 3.2 (some of which might also apply to 3.3);
> plus a significant compile-time performance problem.
>
>> I'd like to see a March 1 release,
>
> I suppose that all those 77(+26) regressions are problems real users had
> with their code bases, so we should at least trim this down significantly.

I agree!  Even if our testing inside SuSE with compilation of around
3000 RPMs has not stumbled over those bugs, it does not mean that
they're not real or unimportant - and I hope that all these bugs will
soon be fixed and we'll also help there.

Note that when we looked first into this in December, we had more than
30 ICEs in different code on x86, now we're down to just 1.

Andreas
-- 
 Andreas Jaeger
  SuSE Labs aj@suse.de
   private aj@arthur.inka.de
    http://www.suse.de/~aj