[Gc] RE: gc6.8, etc.
hans.boehm at hp.com
Thu Jul 13 14:08:53 PDT 2006
One point of general clarification: The "Since gcX.Y:" headings in
README.changes indicate that the changes were performed AFTER version
X.Y, but before the next version. There is a large list of changes in
the "Since 6.8" category, since those were the major changes that led to
version 7. This could have been clearer. If there is a 6.9, those
changes will then be listed in the "Since 6.9" category.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rainer Orth [mailto:ro at TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE]
> Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 1:04 PM
> To: Boehm, Hans
> Cc: Roger Sayle; gc at napali.hpl.hp.com
> Subject: Re: gc6.8, etc.
> > I decided to do a small amount of testing, and release the current
> > gc6.X tree as 6.8. It really only has a couple of additional ports
> > and some small bug fixes relative to 6.7.
> ok, thanks. Checking 6.8, I notice that I've been mislead by
> the gc7.0 CVS doc/README.changes which states
> Since gc6.8:
> - Remove separate Solaris threads support. Use the more
> generic Posix
> It seems that those changes have only been done to the 7.0
> version, despite the heading. I had hoped that those changes
> might be in 6.8 since they let gctest on Solaris/x86 run
> successfully. Unfortunately, those changes have happened
> before 7.0 was imported into CVS, so I cannot extract the
> changes from there either. I'll see if I can extract them
> from the 7.0 sources manually, but somewhat doubt that this
> is acceptable for GCC 4.2.0.
> Maybe I'll just propose the Solaris/amd64 change so at least
> GCC bootstrap works there, or even disable libgcj on that platform.
> > I had hoped to package up a new gc7.0 version as well, but it still
> > seems to have some problems with the dynamic library
> version on Windows.
> > I still hope to do that, but it will be at least a day or
> two. I will
> > call that one 7.0alpha7 to distinguish it from the CVS versions. I
> > hope that it will be reasonably stable, MUCH more so than
> > It has passed tests on various Linux(X86, IA64, X86-64,
> arm) and HP/UX
> > platforms, MacOS/ppc, FreeBSD/X86, and Solaris/SPARC.
> > There will only be a 6.9 if I get one or more critical bug
> fixes. I
> > am no longer planning on including any new features or
> ports in 6.X.
> > Thus if you submit such patches, patches against 7.0, ideally cvs
> > head, are greatly preferred.
> Understood. It makes sense to concentrate on a single
> release branch. I have already tried it on Tru64 UNIX, but
> ran into some issues I'll report separately. With two minor
> fixes, it works on V5.1B provided you don't use GCC > 3.4
> (cf. PR target/28307). On V4.0F, the tests fail to link due
> to their use of vsnprintf which doesn't exist on that release.
> I'll repeat this for IRIX 5/6 once I get to it.
> Rainer Orth, Faculty of Technology, Bielefeld University
More information about the Gc