Alexey,
> On Fri, 21 Jul 2006, Rainer Orth wrote:
>
> > * Try to get as many of those changes as possible into gcc mainline, either
> > for 4.2 or for 4.3 after 4.2 branches.
>
> It cannot go into 4.2 apparently. I believe you're familiar with gcc policies.
I'm not sure: since the 4.2 branch hasn't been cut yet, if the changes are
strictly localized to platform-specific files, they might go in even during
stage 3 with the appropriate maintainer buy-in.
> > * Create two solaris vendor branches (this isn't a csl-only thing, but
> > should be backed by the opensolaris community as a whole): one off gcc
> > 4.1 and another off gcc mainline.
>
> branch of the mainline ?!
> Such things are designed for new features and not for OS support.
>
> 'diff csl-sol210-3_4-branch gcc_343' should go into mainline, otherwise
> we'll end up with 'sol' branches for every major gcc release ON care to
> support.
If there are Solaris-specific changes that are unacceptable to upstream
maintainers, then this will have to remain this way. As I said, we should
minimize the differences, but may not be able to completely eliminate them.
> > * Continue testing with the 4.2/mainline based gcc to make sure it at least
> > compiles ON to be able to switch when/if it is released/stable enough.
>
> As you can see Linux _never_ switched to plain gcc release.
I can't/don't, since I don't use Linux at at all.
> New releases can be provided in distro, but kernel is alwasy based
> on some branch of some release branch. Currently they are 4.0s and 4.1s
This may be for the same reasons as with Solaris: they may require specific
changes that didn't make it into the GCC release, or bug fixes that weren't
acceptable for GCC mainline.
> > The former certainly does not happen, the latter does, as you can see from
> > regular bug reports about issues detected when building and running Linux
> > with gcc mainline.
>
> Great ultimate goal.
> The prerequisite for that is to have 'diff csl-sol210-3_4-branch gcc_343'
> integrated into gcc trunk
True, as far as the changes are acceptable. If anything remains that is
critical for ON, we still need a opensolaris vendor branch to keep the
changes. I think that's much better than having them somewhere local to
the SFW consolidation (and thus well hidden from GCC developers and users).
> > should effectively target the Solaris 11 release, so baseing something on
> > GCC 4.0 for that release is a bad idea since that compiler will be
> > completely obsolete/unmaintained at that time.
>
> I completely disagree. gcc is still patching 3.4 branch.
You're mistaken here: the branch was declared closed after the GCC 3.4.6
release in march, and only two changes were commited there (perhaps
erroneously) after that.
Rainer
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer Orth, Faculty of Technology, Bielefeld University
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
