Re: freeze exception for gcc-4.5 (i386, amd64 only)
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 12:36:34PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 11.08.2010 23:16, Neil McGovern wrote:
> >Hi Matthias,
> >
> >Sorry for not getting back to you sooner.
> >
> >On Sat, Aug 07, 2010 at 11:42:42PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> >>gcc-4.5 should be released with squeeze, at least on amd64 and i386.
> >>gcc-4.5.1 was released a week ago, the first bug and regression fix
> >>release after the initial gcc-4.5.0 release.
> >>
> >
> >Do you have any information as to why this is needed for squeeze, as
> >opposed to squeeze+1? Would this be a nice-to-have, or does it solve a
> >specific problem?
>
> it's more than "nice-to-have". See the reasons in my original
> posting (which you didn't include here in the reply).
>
I'm not sure there are any in the original, plugins and a greater
optimisation level certainly aren't things which will solve specific
problems. Could you highlight them for me?
> >> - gcc-4.5 will be an optional compiler, not replacing the current
> >> defaults.
> >
> >Ok, but if it can be used, it probably will be by at least some things.
>
> correct. but it should not introduce rc issues; if it does, then
> fall back to 4.4, or don't use 4.5 in the first place.
>
Unless things FTBFS on some arches and not others, and thus cause delays
in the freeze.
> >>If port maintainers do want to enable gcc-4.5 on a port, they should
> >>make sure that no regressions are introduced by building the runtime
> >>libraries from
> >>4.5 and ensure that possible regressions are fixed.
> >>
> >
> >This is the bit that worries me. Although it is optional, it can (and
> >IMO will probably) be used by at least some things. This could lead to
> >odd bugs. If there's a problem in GCC 4.5 that isn't in 4.4, and it
> >comes to a security upload, there could be a mismatch between the
> >requirements.
>
> sorry, I don't understand this reasoning and the implications for
> security uploads. If a package is explicitely built with 4.5, it
> will be built with 4.5 for security uploads too.
>
Ok, assume that gcc4.5 has some major bug that causes FTBFSes in
certain circumstances, and a package has been modified in a way to take
advantage of gcc4.5, specifically so it won't build with 4.4; then a
problem would occur.
> >Do you have details as to the (previously mentioned) unit/regression
> >tests?
>
> not besides the test results included in the packages prepared for
> upload. Is there anything more you would expect?
>
You mentioned:
> - the upload will build several runtime libraries from the 4.5
> sources. Regression tests did pass for the runtime libs built
> from the 4.5 sources and for 4.4 using the runtime libs from
> 4.5.
At the moment, I'm still not sure on the actual advantage of introducing this new package at this stage in the release cycle.
Neil
--
* stockholm bangs head against budget
<h01ger> outsch
<stockholm> h01ger: it is still very soft, i did not hurt myself
<gwolf> stockholm: But you bled on the budget, and now it's red again!
Reply to: