Re: gcc 3.2.1 release import?
On Sat, Nov 23, 2002 at 10:06:52PM -0800, Terry Lambert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But who will bell the cat? I vote for Snuffles. Don't understand. Some inside joke or something based on US centric TV? What are you trying to tell me? Remember I'm not native. 1930's/1940's cartoon character, Snuffles, the mouse. Was in a lot of cartoons. Played the Why? game that children play, to the annoyance of his chosen victim, and the amusement of the people. One story was a script based on the Aesop's Fable about belling the cat. Here is a short reprise: 1)All of the mice decided that Something Needs To Be Done About The Cat(tm) 2)They had a big meeting 3)Finally, one mouse, who no one listened to very often, suggests that they put a bell around its neck, so they will be able to tell whic it's coming, and escape, to live in peace, in their mousey ways 4)No one wants to bell the cat; it's a perfect idea, which lacks for implementation, and there are no potential implementors to take the risk on behalf of the group In the cartoon version, at this point, the mouse who made the suggestion is volunteered by his comrades for the deadly duty (Snuffles). Heh, OK :-) I'm also quite sure that gcc3.2.1 release will not find it's way to 5.0 and understand the technical points taken to guard this position. That's why I put possibility and IMHO at the end of my sentence. A patch will be good to have nevertheless, so we can test things out even if it's not going to 5.0-RELEASE. So this boils down to simple question of time, necessity and willingness to do the patch. Let's end this thread. -- Vallo Kallaste [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: gcc 3.2.1 release import?
On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 10:03:50AM -0800, David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would like to see GCC 3.2.1 release be our 5.0-R compiler. However, the GCC 3.2.1 release date kept slipping and in fact was nebulous for a while. The same for our 5.0-R. So this has made it hard to decided what to do. I suspect GCC 3.2.1-R wouldn't cause us much or any problems. But the question is does the project as a whole have the resources to deal with any problems that do creap up? It is a hard judgement call. Somebody with knowledge and time should generate patches, so it's possible to at least test and report problems (or success). Given that enough people give it a try and report, there's possibility for import, IMHO. -- Vallo Kallaste [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: gcc 3.2.1 release import?
Vallo Kallaste wrote: On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 10:03:50AM -0800, David O'Brien I would like to see GCC 3.2.1 release be our 5.0-R compiler. However, the GCC 3.2.1 release date kept slipping and in fact was nebulous for a while. The same for our 5.0-R. So this has made it hard to decided what to do. I suspect GCC 3.2.1-R wouldn't cause us much or any problems. But the question is does the project as a whole have the resources to deal with any problems that do creap up? It is a hard judgement call. Somebody with knowledge and time should generate patches, so it's possible to at least test and report problems (or success). Given that enough people give it a try and report, there's possibility for import, IMHO. But who will bell the cat? I vote for Snuffles. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: gcc 3.2.1 release import?
On Sat, Nov 23, 2002 at 02:52:27PM -0800, Terry Lambert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Somebody with knowledge and time should generate patches, so it's possible to at least test and report problems (or success). Given that enough people give it a try and report, there's possibility for import, IMHO. But who will bell the cat? I vote for Snuffles. Don't understand. Some inside joke or something based on US centric TV? What are you trying to tell me? Remember I'm not native. -- Vallo Kallaste [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: gcc 3.2.1 release import?
At 1:53 AM +0200 2002/11/24, Vallo Kallaste wrote: But who will bell the cat? I vote for Snuffles. Don't understand. Some inside joke or something based on US centric TV? What are you trying to tell me? Remember I'm not native. I am a native US citizen (well, caucasian ;-), and I don't get the reference. Maybe it's something regional, or perhaps something that only the older folks will get. Anyway, I think that he was trying to make is that it's all well and good to talk about doing the debugging, etc..., but the real question is who is sufficiently clueful and has the spare cycles to do all this work in such a short period of time? Frankly, I would be willing to bet large sums of money that it won't happen. Indeed, my vote would be to not attempt to make it happen, and allow for gcc 3.2.1 (or whatever) to be incorporated into -CURRENT after the 5.0-RELEASE. Better the devil you know than the devil you don't. -- Brad Knowles, [EMAIL PROTECTED] They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania. GCS/IT d+(-) s:+(++): a C++(+++)$ UMBSHI$ P+++ L+ !E W+++(--) N+ !w--- O- M++ V PS++(+++) PE- Y+(++) PGP+++ t+(+++) 5++(+++) X++(+++) R+(+++) tv+(+++) b+() DI+() D+(++) G+() e++ h--- r---(+++)* z(+++) To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: gcc 3.2.1 release import?
Belling the cat comes from a children's story, and is often referenced in behavioral economics and game theory. The story goes, the mice decide that life would be much safer if the cat were stuck with a bell around its neck. This way the mice would hear the cat approaching. The problem is, which mouse will risk his life to bell the cat? This problem of belling the cat comes up in everyday life. Why is a planeload of people powerless before a single hijacker, or how can small armies control large populations? In both cases, a simultaneous move by the masses would result in a high degree of success. But the communication and coordination for such actions is difficult. When people must act alone and hope momentum builds up, the question arises, Who is going to go first? -John Von Essen On Saturday, November 23, 2002, at 09:39 PM, Brad Knowles wrote: At 1:53 AM +0200 2002/11/24, Vallo Kallaste wrote: But who will bell the cat? I vote for Snuffles. Don't understand. Some inside joke or something based on US centric TV? What are you trying to tell me? Remember I'm not native. I am a native US citizen (well, caucasian ;-), and I don't get the reference. Maybe it's something regional, or perhaps something that only the older folks will get. Anyway, I think that he was trying to make is that it's all well and good to talk about doing the debugging, etc..., but the real question is who is sufficiently clueful and has the spare cycles to do all this work in such a short period of time? Frankly, I would be willing to bet large sums of money that it won't happen. Indeed, my vote would be to not attempt to make it happen, and allow for gcc 3.2.1 (or whatever) to be incorporated into -CURRENT after the 5.0-RELEASE. Better the devil you know than the devil you don't. -- Brad Knowles, [EMAIL PROTECTED] They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania. GCS/IT d+(-) s:+(++): a C++(+++)$ UMBSHI$ P+++ L+ !E W+++(--) N+ !w--- O- M++ V PS++(+++) PE- Y+(++) PGP+++ t+(+++) 5++(+++) X++(+++) R+(+++) tv+(+++) b+() DI+() D+(++) G+() e++ h--- r---(+++)* z(++ +) To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: gcc 3.2.1 release import?
Vallo Kallaste wrote: On Sat, Nov 23, 2002 at 02:52:27PM -0800, Terry Lambert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Somebody with knowledge and time should generate patches, so it's possible to at least test and report problems (or success). Given that enough people give it a try and report, there's possibility for import, IMHO. But who will bell the cat? I vote for Snuffles. Don't understand. Some inside joke or something based on US centric TV? What are you trying to tell me? Remember I'm not native. 1930's/1940's cartoon character, Snuffles, the mouse. Was in a lot of cartoons. Played the Why? game that children play, to the annoyance of his chosen victim, and the amusement of the people. One story was a script based on the Aesop's Fable about belling the cat. Here is a short reprise: 1) All of the mice decided that Something Needs To Be Done About The Cat(tm) 2) They had a big meeting 3) Finally, one mouse, who no one listened to very often, suggests that they put a bell around its neck, so they will be able to tell whic it's coming, and escape, to live in peace, in their mousey ways 4) No one wants to bell the cat; it's a perfect idea, which lacks for implementation, and there are no potential implementors to take the risk on behalf of the group In the cartoon version, at this point, the mouse who made the suggestion is volunteered by his comrades for the deadly duty (Snuffles). -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: gcc 3.2.1 release import?
Steve Kargl wrote:
Don't worry about it; it's being totally blown out of proportion;
there's no way anyone will commit to importing a 2 day old 3.2.1,
which is why I put the smiley's there.
Well, the 2-day old 3.2.1 fixes numerous problems
with our 3.2.1 [FreeBSD] 20021009 (prerelease).
Compiling this
void ice(int m, int n, double *f) {
int i, j;
for (j = 0; j n; j++) {
for (i = 1; i m; i++) {
f[i] = (double) (i * j);
f[i + j] = (double) ((i + 1) * j);
}
}
}
with gcc -O2 -c yields an ICE in FreeBSD-current.
The 2-day old gcc 3.2.1 does not blow chucks on the
above code.
What does it do for all the other code in -ports, and in the
comp.source.* archives, and that anyone else has ever written,
such that you know it doesn't cause more problems than it
solves?
Supposedly, bringing in 3.2 was going to solve more problems
than it caused. It turns out the 4.x compiler, GCC 2.95.3,
also does not have an ICE as a result of compiling that code.
What is food to one, is to others bitter poison.
-- Titus Lucretius Carus
When you are updating tools, it's actually about risk/reward;
the risk of not supporting IA64, and the risk of the object
file compatability has (supposedly) be addressed.
The only other reasonable path would be to tie FreeBSD releases
to GCC releases, plus some period of time for burn-in, and that
really isn't reasonable: 3.3 was supposed to be out already;
should FreeBSD's release schedule slip every time GGC's slips?
-- Terry
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: gcc 3.2.1 release import?
There is neither a gcc 3.2.1 nor a gcc 3.3 yet, so I would't use any of them in a stable release. In fact, there is a gcc 3.2.1 release. And it seems that 3.2.1 pre-release will be the compiler for 5.0R. Marc To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: gcc 3.2.1 release import?
What does it do for all the other code in -ports, and in the comp.source.* archives, and that anyone else has ever written, such that you know it doesn't cause more problems than it solves? I don't think that the system cc is supposed to compile all code ever written. IMHO It should compile the system (and the port versions of gcc) - not more not less. Supposedly, bringing in 3.2 was going to solve more problems than it caused. It turns out the 4.x compiler, GCC 2.95.3, also does not have an ICE as a result of compiling that code. The problem with the ports is mostly badly written C++ code. Since most (all?) Linux distributions are using gcc 3.2.x by now I'm quite sure it will be fixed over the time.. When you are updating tools, it's actually about risk/reward; the risk of not supporting IA64, and the risk of the object file compatability has (supposedly) be addressed. The question is, how big is the Step from a Nov. pre-release to the release version of gcc 3.2.1. The only other reasonable path would be to tie FreeBSD releases to GCC releases, plus some period of time for burn-in, and that really isn't reasonable: 3.3 was supposed to be out already; should FreeBSD's release schedule slip every time GGC's slips? IMHO it would be a big mistake to tie FreeBSD releases to GCC releases. And going for the latest and greatest isn't an option, too. This time it could just fit. I'm wondering if I should mention the new binutils.. :) Marc To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: gcc 3.2.1 release import?
It's a new import, and a complete regression test. Talk to the maintainer: he's already made his statement, and you arguing with I'm fine with it. In fact, I don't if I would be the gcc mainter if I would import it. Probably not I guess.. me because I was willing to stand up and reiterate what he said in shorter sentences won't make him change his mind, I think. 8-). No, I'm arguing with you, because you said it's _that big_ deal.. :) I fell in love with FreeBSD because of the ports. And we've some nice CC's (like icc) in the ports. As long as the system cc compiles the system, I'm happy. :-) Marc To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: gcc 3.2.1 release import?
On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 03:37:53AM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote: Steve Kargl wrote: Don't worry about it; it's being totally blown out of proportion; there's no way anyone will commit to importing a 2 day old 3.2.1, which is why I put the smiley's there. Well, the 2-day old 3.2.1 fixes numerous problems with our 3.2.1 [FreeBSD] 20021009 (prerelease). Compiling this [[code elided] with gcc -O2 -c yields an ICE in FreeBSD-current. The 2-day old gcc 3.2.1 does not blow chucks on the above code. What does it do for all the other code in -ports, and in the comp.source.* archives, and that anyone else has ever written, such that you know it doesn't cause more problems than it solves? FreeBSD 5.0 is scheduled for a 15 Dec 02 release. We have 24 days to find the problems. With the recent spat of problems reported after DP2 was released, I suspect 15 Dec 02 is optimistic. Supposedly, bringing in 3.2 was going to solve more problems than it caused. It turns out the 4.x compiler, GCC 2.95.3, also does not have an ICE as a result of compiling that code. You know the reason why 3.2 pre-release was brought into the tree, right? GCC has changed the C++ ABI between 3.1.1 and 3.2. If FreeBSD 5.0 shipped with 2.95.3, then 5.x would use 2.95.3 until 6.0 was released. Try getting support from the GCC folks for 2.95.3. I respect David's judgement about bringing 3.2.1 into the tree, but your statement above (totally blown out...) suggests you don't follow GCC development. Several significant bugs were fixed between our pre-release version and 3.2.1. -- Steve To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: gcc 3.2.1 release import?
On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 01:04:40PM +0100, Marc Recht wrote: I'm wondering if I should mention the new binutils.. :) There will be a Binutils 2.13.2 import for 5.0-R w/in days. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: gcc 3.2.1 release import?
On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 07:29:47AM -0800, Steve Kargl wrote: I respect David's judgement about bringing 3.2.1 into the tree, but your statement above (totally blown out...) suggests you don't follow GCC development. Several significant bugs were fixed between our pre-release version and 3.2.1. I would like to see GCC 3.2.1 release be our 5.0-R compiler. However, the GCC 3.2.1 release date kept slipping and in fact was nebulous for a while. The same for our 5.0-R. So this has made it hard to decided what to do. I suspect GCC 3.2.1-R wouldn't cause us much or any problems. But the question is does the project as a whole have the resources to deal with any problems that do creap up? It is a hard judgement call. -- David To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: gcc 3.2.1 release import?
Thus spake David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 12:46:41PM +0100, Marc Recht wrote: Don't worry about it; it's being totally blown out of proportion; No problem.. :) there's no way anyone will commit to importing a 2 day old 3.2.1, which is why I put the smiley's there. Hmm, it's a realease version. It's not the newest bleeding edge pre-release. It really comes down to a question of living with known bugs, or risking gaining a new set of unknown bugs. In theory, the set of bugs in an actual release should be smaller than the set of bugs in a prerelease. If there are still obvious problems with the prerelease we're using, importing 3.2.1 is likely to do more help than harm. But it's up to you and the RE team; I don't care as long as the compiler isn't known to generate incorrect code. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: gcc 3.2.1 release import?
Steve Kargl wrote: Supposedly, bringing in 3.2 was going to solve more problems than it caused. It turns out the 4.x compiler, GCC 2.95.3, also does not have an ICE as a result of compiling that code. You know the reason why 3.2 pre-release was brought into the tree, right? GCC has changed the C++ ABI between 3.1.1 and 3.2. If FreeBSD 5.0 shipped with 2.95.3, then 5.x would use 2.95.3 until 6.0 was released. Try getting support from the GCC folks for 2.95.3. I'm well aware of that. I was merely pointing out that all compiler versions have different bugs, and you might as well suggest a known quantity instead of an unknown one, if your sole goal in life is to avoid a particular internal compiler error, instead of looking at all the code involved. I respect David's judgement about bringing 3.2.1 into the tree, but your statement above (totally blown out...) suggests you don't follow GCC development. Several significant bugs were fixed between our pre-release version and 3.2.1. I *understand* that they fixed several bugs that are present in the pre-release, and they *hope* they didn't introduce any new ones. Given their track record in this regard (e.g. the internal compiler error in 3.2.1-prereelease that wasn't there in 2.95.3), I have little faith in their hope. Unless someone is willing to stand up as a shield to personally take the slings and arrows from any new compiler bugs, which *might* range up to and including delaying the 5.0-RELEASE as a result of it, after import and bmake, not compiling some things that worked with 3.2.1-prerelease, it can wait until after the 5.0-RELEASE. As you yourself pointed out: the C++ ABI change is in already, so it's no longer the substantial risk it used to be. Unless there's another ABI change (which the advocates of importing the prerelease assured us there would not be), then the only thing that not updating breaks is the example code that was posted, and I think we can all live with that until at least the day after the 5.0-RELEASE. 8-). -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: gcc 3.2.1 release import?
David Schultz wrote: It really comes down to a question of living with known bugs, or risking gaining a new set of unknown bugs. In theory, the set of bugs in an actual release should be smaller than the set of bugs in a prerelease. In theory, practice will be the same as theory. 8-) 8-). -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: gcc 3.2.1 release import?
Thus spake David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 05:57:41PM +0100, Marc Recht wrote: Hi! Will gcc 3.2.1/release be imported before 5.0R ? Just curious.. There will be no more GCC imports before 5.0-R. It is just too much code churn with too little road testing before 5.0-R. As I recall, the original plan was to import GCC 3.3 for 5.0-R. At the time, there were concerns about ABI changes between 3.2 and 3.3 that people wanted to get in before 5.0. What is the new plan? GCC 3.3 for 5.1-R? To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: gcc 3.2.1 release import?
David Schultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Will gcc 3.2.1/release be imported before 5.0R ? Just curious.. There will be no more GCC imports before 5.0-R. It is just too much code churn with too little road testing before 5.0-R. As I recall, the original plan was to import GCC 3.3 for 5.0-R. At the time, there were concerns about ABI changes between 3.2 and 3.3 that people wanted to get in before 5.0. What is the new plan? GCC 3.3 for 5.1-R? There is neither a gcc 3.2.1 nor a gcc 3.3 yet, so I would't use any of them in a stable release. -- Hilsen Harald. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: gcc 3.2.1 release import?
There is neither a gcc 3.2.1 nor a gcc 3.3 yet, so I would't use any of them in a stable release. gcc 3.2.1 has been uploaded on ftp.gnu.org at Nov. 19th. Marc To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: gcc 3.2.1 release import?
Marc Recht wrote: There is neither a gcc 3.2.1 nor a gcc 3.3 yet, so I would't use any of them in a stable release. gcc 3.2.1 has been uploaded on ftp.gnu.org at Nov. 19th. So it's been extensively tested by the full user base for the last two days, and you should have known about it before you posted. 8-) 8-). -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: gcc 3.2.1 release import?
Marc Recht wrote: So it's been extensively tested by the full user base for the last two days, and you should have known about it before you posted. 8-) 8-). My original question was only if it will be imported before 5.0R. David O'Brien already answered it with no. That's fine with me. Don't worry about it; it's being totally blown out of proportion; there's no way anyone will commit to importing a 2 day old 3.2.1, which is why I put the smiley's there. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: gcc 3.2.1 release import?
On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 10:22:42PM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
Marc Recht wrote:
So it's been extensively tested by the full user base for the
last two days, and you should have known about it before you
posted. 8-) 8-).
My original question was only if it will be imported before 5.0R. David
O'Brien already answered it with no. That's fine with me.
Don't worry about it; it's being totally blown out of proportion;
there's no way anyone will commit to importing a 2 day old 3.2.1,
which is why I put the smiley's there.
Well, the 2-day old 3.2.1 fixes numerous problems
with our 3.2.1 [FreeBSD] 20021009 (prerelease).
Compiling this
void ice(int m, int n, double *f) {
int i, j;
for (j = 0; j n; j++) {
for (i = 1; i m; i++) {
f[i] = (double) (i * j);
f[i + j] = (double) ((i + 1) * j);
}
}
}
with gcc -O2 -c yields an ICE in FreeBSD-current.
The 2-day old gcc 3.2.1 does not blow chucks on the
above code.
--
Steve
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
gcc 3.2.1 release import?
Hi! Will gcc 3.2.1/release be imported before 5.0R ? Just curious.. Marc To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: gcc 3.2.1 release import?
On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 05:57:41PM +0100, Marc Recht wrote: Hi! Will gcc 3.2.1/release be imported before 5.0R ? Just curious.. There will be no more GCC imports before 5.0-R. It is just too much code churn with too little road testing before 5.0-R. -- -- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: gcc 3.2.1 release import?
On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 08:14:49PM -0800, David O'Brien wrote: On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 05:57:41PM +0100, Marc Recht wrote: Hi! Will gcc 3.2.1/release be imported before 5.0R ? Just curious.. There will be no more GCC imports before 5.0-R. It is just too much code churn with too little road testing before 5.0-R. David, Can you close PR gnu/44426? It details a bug in FreeBSD's pre-release version of 3.2.1, which is fixed in more recent 3.2.1 sources. -- Steve To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
