https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96854
--- Comment #17 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> --- On Sun, 6 Sep 2020, already5chosen at yahoo dot com wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96854 > > --- Comment #15 from Michael_S <already5chosen at yahoo dot com> --- > Thank you. > That does not sound too different from what I assumed in post above. > 10.1.0 is release. Expected to be used by "normal" people. > 10.1.1 was for purpose of development of 10.2.0. Since release of 10.2.0 it is > obsolete. > 10.2.0 is release. Expected to be used by "normal" people. > 10.2.1 exists for purpose of development of 10.3.0. > > >> Generally, it is advisable to use snapshots from the release branches, as > >> otherwise one misses dozens to hundreds of bugfixes that were fixed since > >> the last release. > > That a little confusing. > I am compiler user, not compiler developer. Is it advisable for me to download > and compile snapshots ?! If you can wait then no, 10.x.0 are the "releases". If you are using pre-built binaries from some Linux distribution or other distributor then the distributor usually picks up the current branch head for you. > I would think that for people like me 3-4 month cadence of gcc releases is > already too quick. Well, all of GCC 10.x.[01] are one major release with a major release cadence of about one year. Everything else inbetween is just accumulated bugfixes with the "conveniece" of us doing 10.2.0 and later 10.3.0 at random points to officially release a tarball with accumulated bugfixes. You could say we should make it GCC 10.bugfix-nr and thus only have two numbers ;)
