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! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100818143615.gn7...@halon.org.uk
