From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Cagney To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain , Daniel Berlin Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: C++ FAIL counts and the effect of demangler fix Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 10:27:00 -0000 Message-id: <3A8C1E5E.F4A2C5E2@cygnus.com> References: <200102141649.IAA28922@bosch.cygnus.com> X-SW-Source: 2001-02/msg00179.html Michael Elizabeth Chastain wrote: > > It would be nice if the problems were resolved, however, they are _NOT_ > > a 5.1 release criteria so not especially high on my radar. 5.1 needs > > to work with real compilers installed on real machines. > > I respectfully disagree. I think gdb 5.1 needs to be ready for gcc 3.0. I can see why both of you might disagree, however my position stands. Remember: o I'm not stopping you trying to fix all the bugs. I'm just stopping you making that last critical bug/feature (minus the next one) the reason to delay the release of GDB 5.1. o we're trying to move to a situtation where there are more frequent releases of GDB (and I'm failing dismally). Right now 5.1 is effectivly stuck because it needs SPARC/Linux fixed. o I don't want GDB's release schedule in someway directly tided to GCC's release schedule. I also posted this decision to the discussion list and at the time I had ZERO responses. Andrew