What goes into gcc-3.0.1 and what not?

Tom Tromey tromey@redhat.com
Mon Jul 16 10:30:00 GMT 2001


>>>>> "Martin" == Martin Kahlert <martin.kahlert@infineon.com> writes:

Martin> Could anybody please tell me about what goes into the trunk
Martin> and what patches are considered for 3.0.1?

Good question.

Here is the message Mark sent out about 3.0.1:

    http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2001-06/msg01382.html

Now, for 3.0 the criteria for Java were more relaxed than for the rest
of the compiler.  And I assume we have some leeway in 3.0.1 as well.

I personally have only been putting in fixes which are not likely to
break an existing supported platform and which will help us build on a
new platform.  I haven't been checking in fixes to the libraries and
the like, even if they are relatively simple.

There are a few patches pending which do this and which I hope to look
at this week.

Martin> This doesn't seem to be the case in libgcj. E.g. JNI bugfixes
Martin> are considered not important enough to go into 3.0.1.

Actually, we haven't really discussed it.

I don't have a problem moving JNI fixes from 3.1 to 3.0.1.  They are
very unlikely to break anything that isn't already broken.  However,
where do we draw the line?  How would we decide what not to put in
3.0.1?

Tom



More information about the Java mailing list