| 1 |
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Kristian Fiskerstrand <k_f@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Sounds like a reasonable action plan. The consequences of such a change |
| 3 |
> definitely seems to be sufficiently high to merit a proper migration |
| 4 |
> plan which doesn't seem to have been established at this point. Whether |
| 5 |
> that can be added to a later point with gcc6 (e.g by adding a new |
| 6 |
> profile, or a later point release) I don't have strong opinions on, but |
| 7 |
> there should be a plan and proper overview of the consequences. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
Yeah, I think I agree. From the discussions so far, I think that we |
| 10 |
should definitely aim for making pie the default for everyone (on |
| 11 |
arches where it makes sense), but doing it in the gcc-6 now which has |
| 12 |
seen only a short period of testing so far seems a bit hasty based on |
| 13 |
data from the messages that I've seen in these threads so far. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Cheers, |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Dirkjan |
Archives