Target-specific bugs (was Re: Number of 3.3 hi-pri PRs going up)

[Nathanael Nerode]

Joel wrote:
>I don't know that this is entirely true.  I have been reporting on my 
>results of building about 35-40 cross targets on a GNU/Linux.  On those
You rock!
...

>> For another thought, I strongly suggest that any bug in feedback and
>> without feedback for 3 months be closed, and that this be documented
>> somewhere.  (The standard I've been using is 6 months, which I think 
>is
>> overly generous.)
>
>I think that will end up closing some that are simply being ignored
>without
>ever being addressed or fixed.  For example, I filed PR 3587 
>on "Fri Jul 06 06:46:02 PDT 2001", it still applies to the 3.2 and 3.3
>branches
>(no testing on trunk), and has never gotten a bit of attention.  
Shouldn't be in feedback anymore -- feedback is for 'maintainers need 
more information to reproduce'.  And I meant 'waiting for feedback for > 3 
months'.  I would like to throw away some reports which haven't been 
tested on any current version (only RH2.96 or earlier), but if it's 
been reproduced on the 3.2 or 3.3 branches, it should certainly be open.

(Well, except for the mass of C++ old parser bugs, since they're really 
'wontfix' bugs prior to the new parser).

(Or if it's a bug against a dead target, in which case we should 
pull support for the target rather than pretending it works.  Which 
requires discussion on gcc@gcc.gnu.org first.)

Sorry nobody's actually fixed your bug.

--Nathanael