[gentoo-dev] GCC 4.1.1 testing/stablization and glibc 2.4

[gentoo-dev] GCC 4.1.1 testing/stablization and glibc 2.4

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 796 bytes --]

OK, guys, I was speaking with vapier earlier about the possibility of
getting gcc 4.1.1 stable for the 2006.1 release.  We've managed to build
some release media with it, and are planning on doing more testing with
it.  What we really need is for more people to test this on various
platforms and to get all of the bugs worked out that we can.  We're
already ramping up our release cycle, and would like to get this
included, so we don't have to wait until 2007 for a release with >= GCC
4.1 in it.

We are also testing glibc 2.4, which will likely go to stable on the
supporting architectures during the release cycle.  We always welcome
more testing, though.  =]

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead
x86 Architecture Team
Games - Developer
Gentoo Linux

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] GCC 4.1.1 testing/stablization and glibc 2.4

[Donnie Berkholz]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 983 bytes --]

Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> OK, guys, I was speaking with vapier earlier about the possibility of
> getting gcc 4.1.1 stable for the 2006.1 release.  We've managed to build
> some release media with it, and are planning on doing more testing with
> it.  What we really need is for more people to test this on various
> platforms and to get all of the bugs worked out that we can.  We're
> already ramping up our release cycle, and would like to get this
> included, so we don't have to wait until 2007 for a release with >= GCC
> 4.1 in it.

That would be really cool. I'm already been testing both this and the
glibc on the ~1500 packages installed on my x86, plus the Pegasos ppc
and iBook I've got around. I'll do the same on sparc as soon as it shows
up in ~arch there.

> We are also testing glibc 2.4, which will likely go to stable on the
> supporting architectures during the release cycle.  We always welcome
> more testing, though.  =]

Thanks,
Donnie


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 252 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] GCC 4.1.1 testing/stablization and glibc 2.4

[Dan Meltzer]

On 6/27/06, Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@gentoo.org> wrote:
> OK, guys, I was speaking with vapier earlier about the possibility of
> getting gcc 4.1.1 stable for the 2006.1 release.  We've managed to build
> some release media with it, and are planning on doing more testing with
> it.  What we really need is for more people to test this on various
> platforms and to get all of the bugs worked out that we can.  We're
> already ramping up our release cycle, and would like to get this
> included, so we don't have to wait until 2007 for a release with >= GCC
> 4.1 in it.
>
> We are also testing glibc 2.4, which will likely go to stable on the
> supporting architectures during the release cycle.  We always welcome
> more testing, though.  =]
>
I've been running gcc-4.1.1 and glibc-2.4-r3 for a while now and have
seen no problems running or compiling anything with them yet on x86.
> --
> Chris Gianelloni
> Release Engineering - Strategic Lead
> x86 Architecture Team
> Games - Developer
> Gentoo Linux
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQBEoal/kT4lNIS36YERAjYkAJ0dsk34qihWGSPATm/fj/qpYg+euACeOzh+
> Rc6nW515lcQ0KXewJ1q1J/o=
> =DiU1
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
>
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] GCC 4.1.1 testing/stablization and glibc 2.4

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 924 bytes --]

On Tuesday 27 June 2006 18:32, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> > OK, guys, I was speaking with vapier earlier about the possibility of
> > getting gcc 4.1.1 stable for the 2006.1 release.  We've managed to build
> > some release media with it, and are planning on doing more testing with
> > it.  What we really need is for more people to test this on various
> > platforms and to get all of the bugs worked out that we can.  We're
> > already ramping up our release cycle, and would like to get this
> > included, so we don't have to wait until 2007 for a release with >= GCC
> > 4.1 in it.
>
> That would be really cool. I'm already been testing both this and the
> glibc on the ~1500 packages installed on my x86, plus the Pegasos ppc
> and iBook I've got around. I'll do the same on sparc as soon as it shows
> up in ~arch there.

the trouble is we need these packages in arch now, not ~arch :)
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 827 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.1.1 testing/stablization and glibc 2.4

[Ryan Hill]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 706 bytes --]

Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> OK, guys, I was speaking with vapier earlier about the possibility of
> getting gcc 4.1.1 stable for the 2006.1 release.  We've managed to build
> some release media with it, and are planning on doing more testing with
> it.  What we really need is for more people to test this on various
> platforms and to get all of the bugs worked out that we can.  We're
> already ramping up our release cycle, and would like to get this
> included, so we don't have to wait until 2007 for a release with >= GCC
> 4.1 in it.

Should arch testers start working with 4.1.1 then?  And do you want bugs to
block #117482?

--de.


https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=117482


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.1.1 testing/stablization and glibc 2.4

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 973 bytes --]

On Sat, 2006-07-01 at 12:18 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote:
> Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> > OK, guys, I was speaking with vapier earlier about the possibility of
> > getting gcc 4.1.1 stable for the 2006.1 release.  We've managed to build
> > some release media with it, and are planning on doing more testing with
> > it.  What we really need is for more people to test this on various
> > platforms and to get all of the bugs worked out that we can.  We're
> > already ramping up our release cycle, and would like to get this
> > included, so we don't have to wait until 2007 for a release with >= GCC
> > 4.1 in it.
> 
> Should arch testers start working with 4.1.1 then?  And do you want bugs to
> block #117482?

Arch testers should contact their architecture's leads or Release
Engineering Architecture Coordinator.  As for bug reports, yes.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead
x86 Architecture Team
Games - Developer
Gentoo Linux

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.1.1 testing/stablization and glibc 2.4

[Ryan Hill]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 934 bytes --]

Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-07-01 at 12:18 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote:

>> Should arch testers start working with 4.1.1 then?  And do you want bugs to
>> block #117482?

> Arch testers should contact their architecture's leads or Release
> Engineering Architecture Coordinator.  As for bug reports, yes.

Just an update - I've finished most major desktop stuff for x86 without any
problems.  I'm moving onto stuff that's already on the tracker and is fixed in
testing but not stable.  Rather than open and track a ton of new bugs, I'd like
to reopen the original ~arch bugs and request a backport or stabilization at the
maintainer's discretion.

Is this okay, or would people rather get a shiny new bug?  Keep in mind there
are already 290 bugs on the tracker.  Alternatively, would it be better to just
start a new tracker bug for stabilization?

https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=117482

--de.


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.1.1 testing/stablization and glibc 2.4

[R Hill]

(apologies in advance if this goes through twice)

 Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-07-01 at 12:18 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote:

>> Should arch testers start working with 4.1.1 then?  And do you want bugs to
>> block #117482?

> Arch testers should contact their architecture's leads or Release
> Engineering Architecture Coordinator.  As for bug reports, yes.

Just an update - I've finished most major desktop stuff for x86 without any
problems.  I'm moving onto stuff that's already on the tracker and is fixed in
testing but not stable.  Rather than open and track a ton of new bugs, I'd like
to reopen the original ~arch bugs and request a backport or stabilization at the
maintainer's discretion.

Is this okay, or would people rather get a shiny new bug?  Keep in mind there
are already 290 bugs on the tracker.  Alternatively, would it be better to just
start a new tracker bug for stabilization?

https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=117482

--de.


-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.1.1 testing/stablization and glibc 2.4

[Ryan Hill]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 464 bytes --]

Ryan Hill wrote:

> Just an update - I've finished most major desktop stuff for x86 without any
> problems.  I'm moving onto stuff that's already on the tracker and is fixed in
> testing but not stable.  Rather than open and track a ton of new bugs, I'd like
> to reopen the original ~arch bugs and request a backport or stabilization at the
> maintainer's discretion.

I changed my mind.  Reopening these just creates too much random bugspam.

--de.


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]