Re: 3.2 transition
Daniel Jacobowitz writes:
> On Sun, Dec 15, 2002 at 09:59:34PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 15, 2002 at 11:16:41PM +0000, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> > > * Daniel Jacobowitz (firstname.lastname@example.org) wrote:
> > > > Reference: http://people.debian.org/~rmurray/c++transition.html, which seems
> > > > to be the latest copy.
> > > >
> > > > My understanding is that GCC 3.2 now works on all architectures. That means
> > > > we're now past the last big blocker waiting for the transition. Does anyone
> > > > know of anything else holding us up, besides someone to manage the process?
> > > >
> > > > If not, it sounds like it's time to begin.
> > >
> > > I wonder how well tested it is on all architectures? I'd worry about
> > > things like exception handling and threading being fully tested on all
> > > architectures.
> > When we say "works on all architectures" that means it passes the
> > regression tests as expected. That's no trivial thing either.
> Actually, someone needs to find out why the regression tests hang on
> m68k.... that's sort of important.
that's simple, m68k is getting better, not many regressions in the
testsuite, and then the buildd timeout hits ;-) It should be fixable
within 72 hours (the time gcc needs to build on m68k).