Mark,
One other question. Does the bug fixed by the offending patch...
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-12/msg01010.html
...merit breaking even a secondary target? Wouldn't it be better
to regress that patch out for gcc 4.3.0 (to be reintroduced in
gcc 4.3.1 when the problems that it causes for darwin are solved)?
Jack
On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 11:57:33AM -0800, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> Jack Howarth wrote:
>> Mark,
>> I can understand the FSF gcc developers' frustration at
>> the lack of participation by the darwin developers. However
>> I still think it merits at least understanding why r131198
>> is breaking the linkage on darwin. It may well be that darwin
>> to exposing a latent bug in the use of install-leaf.
>
> I didn't mean to imply otherwise. My statement was simply that Darwin-only
> problems are not in and of themselves release-blockers for 4.3.0.
>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> Mark Mitchell
> CodeSourcery
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> (650) 331-3385 x713
