[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: bits from the release team: release goals, python, X.org, amd64, timeline

On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 02:50:16PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 12:05:26PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > Timeline
> > ========

> > Now, let's please take a more detailed look at the time line:

> >          Thu 15 Jun 06:

> >     last chance to switch to gcc 4.1, python 2.4
> >     review architectures one more time
> >     last chance to add new architectures

> >     RC bug count less than 300

> Since m68k pretty much depends on the gcc-4.1 transition to make it in
> again, I would suggest that we (as in, the m68k port) make the switch to
> GCC4.1 as the default already. This will allow us to verify that stuff
> actually builds and works, and to catch up with building those that fail
> with ICE in gcc-4.0 before that time. Since m68k is not a release
> architecture right now, this should not cause any problems for any other
> port if the GCC 4.1 transition does not happen, but it will help if it
> does.

> Thoughts, objections?

Since it seems gcc-4.1 is the only way to get m68k back up to building a
decent fraction of the archive, I think it's fair to switch to
gcc-4.1/g++-4.1 as the default now on m68k, yes.  From everything I hear, it
at least isn't going to be worse than the status quo.

I still wouldn't count gcc-4.1 build regressions in packages as
release-critical until at least one other architecture had switched to it as
default, even if m68k was otherwise ready to go as a release candidate, but
that shouldn't stop you from doing porter NMUs anyway.

BTW, can you tell me anything about the dip in
http://buildd.debian.org/stats/graph2-quarter-big.png for m68k?  Seems to be
heading in the wrong direction again for being a release candidate.  I see
12 buildds actively uploading packages for m68k, is this too few or is there
some other problem?

Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org                                   http://www.debian.org/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: