Roadmap for 4.9.1, 4.10.0 and onwards?
Hi, I've been tracking the latest releases of gcc since 4.7 or so (variously interested in C++1y support, cilk and openmp). One thing I've found hard to locate is information about planned inclusions for future releases. As much relies on unpredictable community contributions I don't expect there to be a concrete or reliable plan. However, equally I'm sure the steering committee have some ideas over what ought to be upcoming releases. Is this published anywhere? For example if I look at: https://gcc.gnu.org/projects/cxx1y.html There are 3 items marked "no" under C++14 support. Which if any are tabled for 4.10.0?More generally what targets (obviously subject to change) are there for 4.10.0? or 4.9.1? Regards, Bruce.
Supported targets
Hi, Slightly related to my previous question about the roadmap. I have two quite old targets based on (so far as I know) standard linux distributions. Should they still be supported? RHEL4 (kernel 2.6.9-55.ELsmp): I was able to compile 4.8.1 successfully when it was released. 4.9.0 fails as below. RHEL4 is end of life (but not extended life). My feeling is this ought to work and is probably a regression I should report? SUSE LINUX Enterprise Server 9 (i586) (kernal 2.6.5-7.111-smp) I was able to compile gcc 4.7.0 successfully when it was released. I had less luck with 4.8.0. 4.9.0 fails as below. However, this machine/distribution is so old it is not unreasonable to say it should be scrapped. My main targets are RHEL5 and RHEL6 which work perfectly. I also tried bootstrapping using 4.8.1 to build 4.9.0 on RHEL4 and 4.7.0 to build 4.9.0 on the Suse box rather than the ancient system installed versions (RHEL4 = gcc 3.4.6, Suse 9 = 3.3.3) but without success. Regards, Bruce. RHEL4 (kernel 2.6.9-55.ELsmp): [snip] ../../../../gcc-4.9.0/libsanitizer/include/system/linux/aio_abi.h:2:32: fatal error: linux/aio_abi.h: No such file or director y #include_next ^ compilation terminated. make[3]: *** [sanitizer_platform_limits_linux.lo] Error 1 make[3]: Leaving directory `/development/brucea/gcc/build/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common' make[2]: *** [install-recursive] Error 1 [snip] SUSE LINUX Enterprise Server 9 (i586) (kernal 2.6.5-7.111-smp) [snip] /development/dev1/brucea/gcc4.7/bin/../lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.7.0/../../../../i686-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld: /home/brucea/gcc4 .9/lib/libmpfr.so: undefined reference to symbol '___tls_get_addr@@GLIBC_2.3' /development/dev1/brucea/gcc4.7/bin/../lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.7.0/../../../../i686-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld: note: '___tls_get _addr@@GLIBC_2.3' is defined in DSO /lib/ld-linux.so.2 so try adding it to the linker command line /lib/ld-linux.so.2: could not read symbols: Invalid operation collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status make[3]: *** [cc1] Error 1 [snip] Requires a later version of glibc?
Re: Roadmap for 4.9.1, 4.10.0 and onwards?
- Original Message - > From: Paulo Matos > To: Basile Starynkevitch ; Bruce Adams > > Cc: "gcc@gcc.gnu.org" > Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 5:04 PM > Subject: RE: Roadmap for 4.9.1, 4.10.0 and onwards? > >> -Original Message- >> From: gcc-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf >> Of Basile Starynkevitch >> Sent: 20 May 2014 16:29 >> To: Bruce Adams >> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org >> Subject: Re: Roadmap for 4.9.1, 4.10.0 and onwards? >> >> On Tue, 2014-05-20 at 11:09 +0100, Bruce Adams wrote: >> > Hi, >> > I've been tracking the latest releases of gcc since 4.7 or so >> (variously interested in C++1y support, cilk and openmp). >> > One thing I've found hard to locate is information about planned >> inclusions for future releases. >> > As much relies on unpredictable community contributions I don't >> expect there to be a concrete or reliable plan. >> >> > However, equally I'm sure the steering committee have some ideas >> over >> > what ought to be upcoming releases. >> >> As a whole, the steering committee does not have any idea, because GCC >> development is based upon volunteer contributions. >> > > I understand the argument but I am not sure it's the way to go. Even if the > project is based on volunteer contributions it would be interesting to have a > tentative roadmap. This, I would think, would also help possible beginner > volunteers know where to start if they wanted to contribute to the project. > So > the roadmap could be a list of features (big or small) of bug fixes that we > would like fixed for a particular version. Even if we don't want to name it > roadmap it would still be interesting to have a list of things that are being > worked on or on the process of being merged into mainline and therefore will > make it to the next major version. > > That being said I know it's hard to set sometime apart to write this kind of > thing given most of us prefer to be hacking on GCC. From a newcomer point of > view, however, not having things like a roadmap makes it look like the > project > is heading nowhere. > If you think of gcc as a large distributed agile project the road map may be buried somewhere in the bug database. Perhaps its a matter of mining the relevant details or encouraging practices that make them mineable? The bugzilla has fields for assignee, priority and target milestone that could be used as hints. The trouble is its very low level. The intent is buried in the communities subjective interpretation of priority. I don't know how well that mirrors the actual values in the priority fields. I wouldn't expect it to without a conscious effort. If I search for "ALL cilk 4.9" or "ALL cilk" it is still not obvious that the cilk branch was merged into main prior to release 4.9.0. Though that could be down to my unfamiliarity with more complex queries in bugzilla. Regards, Bruce.
