Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2006 18:04:36 -0800 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@freebsd.org> To: "O. Hartmann" <ohartman@zedat.fu-berlin.de> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Let's use gcc-4.2, not 4.1 -- OpenMP Message-ID: <20061215020436.GB33730@dragon.NUXI.org> In-Reply-To: <458101C4.8090106@zedat.fu-berlin.de> References: <20061213192150.CF83D16A417@hub.freebsd.org> <200612131440.04076.mi%2Bmx@aldan.algebra.com> <4580766A.600@samsco.org> <200612131711.50921.mi%2Bmx@aldan.algebra.com> <458101C4.8090106@zedat.fu-berlin.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Dec 14, 2006 at 08:48:20AM +0100, O. Hartmann wrote: > I'm not very familiar with the compiler development, but it seemed to > me gcc 4.1 was like a interim solution. This arose due to the fast > appeareance of it's successor ... The goal is more frequent major (ie, X.Y.0 -> X.Y+1.0) releases. Like our 4.0 -> 5.0 experience, GCC when thru similar with its 2.95 -> 3.0.0 release. As much new FreeBSD features are developed in an alternate repository (Perforce) after 5.0, GCC makes heavy use of developement branches which are only merged into the mainline (think our CVS HEAD repository) when they are ready for prime-time. You can read the development methodology and rationale at http://gcc.gnu.org/develop.html -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20061215020436.GB33730>