| 1 |
> correct. |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> From the reports we are getting in/about 3.4.x and SSE2 and or |
| 4 |
> fundamental CXX bugs the chances are looking pretty slim to none that |
| 5 |
> 3.4.x will be targeted for the next release cycle for many/most arches. |
| 6 |
> With development being stopped on the 3.4.x series and the 3.5 being |
| 7 |
> sorta a mess I can't see us leaving the existing toolchain setup for a |
| 8 |
> while expect maybe for a push of binutils-2.15 to stable on a few |
| 9 |
> arches. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
As far as I can tell, the SSE2 bugs have only hit 3.4.2, which is now |
| 12 |
masked. 3.4.1 appears to be fine, and indeed less broken for SSE2 than |
| 13 |
3.3.x. The CXX bugs will only come out of the woodwork with testing, so |
| 14 |
some testing (~x86) would be nice. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
3.5 is now 4.0, and as far as I know I'm the only person doing serious |
| 17 |
testing (testsuites included). From what I've seen so far, it's fairly |
| 18 |
rock-solid for where it is at the moment (early stage3), certainly more |
| 19 |
so than 3.4 was; there are still internal compiler errors on important |
| 20 |
stuff like glibc but these invariably get fixed in the last week-long |
| 21 |
"big push" where they desperately call for testers in a mad rush to get |
| 22 |
the thing released! That said, there's no way gcc-4 will be in ~x86 for |
| 23 |
2004.3, almost no way (unless it surprises me) it'll be in ~x86 for |
| 24 |
2004.0, but may be in most ~arches for 2004.1, assuming the slightly |
| 25 |
stronger code strictness doesn't cause to many nasty bugs and assuming |
| 26 |
we can iron out all the ICEs. |
Archives