------- Comment #20 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-11 17:16 ------- (In reply to comment #14) > Subject: Re: testsuite failures in actual_array_constructor_2.f90 > and actual_array_substr_2.f90 > Kaveh > > ------- Comment #13 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-10 21:45 > > ------- > > Paul - The bug is not "FIXED" in 4.0, please don't mark it as such yet. > > "WONTFIX" may be a more accurate description if that is the group decision. > > You can remove yourself from the assigned field if you aren't able to work > > on > > it. > > > I am sorry, but I genuinely thought that only the testscases were present: > I checked out fortran and the testsuite from gcc-4_0-branch and could > not find any trace of this patch in the ChangeLogs but the testcases ARE > there. On this basis, I thought that there was nothing to fix. > > Regarding your last checkin to 4.0, the archives seem to show that you were > > the > > one who checked in the testcase and the fortran patches. > > > > http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/branches/gcc-4_0-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/actual_array_constructor_2.f90?view=log > > > > So I'm somewhat mystified by your "hands unknown" comment. :-) > > > The evidence is incontrovertible :-) OK, it is obvious that I am > missing something here. Why does the 4.0 branch not reflect this patch? > > Could you please take a second look? Maybe the whole patch and the > > testcases > > should be reverted on 4.0? > > > Yes, please. Note that this is not a WONTFIX but rather a CANTFIX; my > time is taken by other things than gcc, right now, and, additionally, I > no longer have a 4.0 tree; in fact I just scrubbed 4.1 as well. > I am not trying to be difficult, cantankerous or awkward - I tried to > look into it and just do not understand what is going on. > Cheers > Paul
Paul - I understand that you may not have time to actually fix the bug. However something seems to have gone wrong here and we need to address it. Your help in understanding where to go from here is necessary. And I believe that since you were the proximate cause of the problem (by mistakenly checking in the patch to 4.0) you are at least morally obligatged to help us understand what's the best course of action, within the confines of a volunteer effort. Can we agree on that? Now I see several possible paths forward: 1. Fix the actual bug. Probably not going to happen unless someone volunteers. 2. Revert just the testcases. 3. Revert the testcases and the code changes. I think if we go with 2 or 3 we need to understand what are the ramifications of leaving in or taking out the fortran frontend code changes that you mistakenly checked in last summer. That's where I think your help would be appreciated. Can you offer an opinion on which option is safer and why? "Safety" and avoiding regressions is paramount on 4.0 right now, as this branch should be kept very stable. Thanks, --Kaveh -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30399
