On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 03:37:44PM +0200, Mikael Morin wrote: > On Thursday 18 August 2011 11:59:36 Tobias Burnus wrote: > > > > I wonder how far we should backport; the program is said to work in > > 4.1.2 and 4.2.5, but to fail in 4.3.6 up to the trunk. Oldest maintained > > GCC is 4.4.6. The patch is relatively simple, but as the long time > > between breakage and report shows, it does not seem to affect many users. > > > > I think we should backport the patch at least to 4.6 and 4.5 , > > makes sense. > > but one could also consider 4.4 or even 4.3. What do you think? > It looks like a real bug, with a simple fix, so I would say 4.4 too. > About 4.3, as it is unmaintained, we are not supposed to backport patches for > it?
I agree with Mikael that the patch looks fairly simple (so a bad side effect should not occur). A backport to 4.4 is fine with me. -- Steve
