[Gc] RE: gc6.8, etc.

Boehm, Hans 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.
> Hans,
> > 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
>    implementation.
> 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 
> 7.0alpha5.  
> > 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
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------------
> Rainer Orth, Faculty of Technology, Bielefeld University

More information about the Gc mailing list