On Fri, Sep 30, 2005 at 10:06:07AM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote: > The key question is whether to do an immediate 4.0.3 to catch up to what > we intended. (That's not entirely trivial, in that things have now been > checked in on the 4.0 branch, so we would have to temporarily back out > some patches, or apply tags very carefully.) Or, we could do a 4.0.3 > based on current bits. > > My inclination is to do nothing (other than correct the target > milestones on these bugs in bugzilla) and move on. The Solaris problem > is bad, and I beat up on Benjamin to get it fixed, but I'm not sure it's > a crisis meriting another release cycle. The C++ change fixed a > regression relative to 3.4.x, but not 4.0.x. Andreas' change is only > known to affect m68k.
... but IIRC it cripples GCC for m68k; Debian turned up hundreds of build failures because of this bug and it set builds back several weeks. Personally, I'd do a 4.0.3 based on current bits. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery, LLC
