gcc-reports in the Debian BTS
Looking at the number of open and forwarded reports, it looks like one
of the maintainers will soon orphan the package or fade away ...
No, but I ask for help. It would be nice to address the reports for
the woody release and more important for the next gcc release. It is
nice to see upstream developers like Martin, Phil and Tom give
feedback on the reports, but I need to be more active on this (which
my time does not permit for the moment). What needs to be done (from
my point of view):
- Forwarding reports upstream:
+ reproducing a report
+ checking with gcc-3.0.3 and HEAD
+ forwarding the report (set Reply-To: <debian-no>@bugs.debian.org)
+ changing the subject to include the upostream report number
- Scanning forwarded reports:
+ basically looking at upstream gnats
- If a report is found to be fixed:
+ reported for gcc-2.95 and fixed in 3.0:
- reassign to XXX-2.95
- set severity to fixed
+ reported for gcc-2.95 or 3.0 and fixed in HEAD:
- prefix report subject with: fixed in CVS 2002xxyy
- for checking against head, I revived the gcc-snapshot package
and plan to upload it to unstable (not experimental, because this
does not get built by the autobuilders and a bug submitter isn't
supposed to build a snapshot package on his own). Probably we want
to setup a gcc HEAD which can be accessed on the web and compile
things. CodeSourcery did have something like this for i386.
Any volunteers for some category of bug reports?
Currently I am preparing new packages for 2.95 and 3.0, mostly
consisting of packaging fixes, enabling pascal for mips/mipsel and
java for s390.
I would like to pack these with the current HEAD testsuite, so we get
results against current HEAD, knowing that m68k and arm will not be
happy about build times ...
Matthias
Reply to: