Re: HEADS-UP: GCC 3.4.2 snapshot import is imminent

On Fri, Jul 30, 2004 at 10:58:00AM +0700, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 29, 2004 at 02:19:19AM +0000, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 27, 2004 at 05:20:21PM +0700, Max Khon wrote:
> > > Hi, Alexander!
> > > 
> > > On Tue, Jul 27, 2004 at 02:18:20AM +0000, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
> > > 
> > > >   I am going to do an import of GCC 3.4.x snapshot in approximately
> > > > 24 hours. At this time I would like to request anyone planning any
> > > > sweeping changes in the tree to pospone them until new GCC is in.
> > > > The snapshot will be followed by GCC 3.4.2 release when it is available.
> > > 
> > > Do you plan to enable HANDLE_PRAGMA_PACK_PUSH_POP feature?
> > > 
> > > /fjoe
> > Is was too late in the game for me to enable it in this snapshot. I will
> > consider doing that in the next GCC update. I do not recall anyone ever 
> > mentioning this feature to me before, let alone aking me to enable it.
> 
> Actually, I did, in private mails to both you and obrien_at_ few days ago.

July 27th, to be exact.

% gcc --version
gcc (GCC) 3.4.2 [FreeBSD] 20040728

One day before import is what I call 'too late in the game'.

> I encountered this problem when porting CPP code to FreeBSD recently.
> #pragma pack (push/pop) feature is enabled with some major Linux
> distributed gcc (Fedora Core is one of them), which increases chances
> that we'd have to do something about it, since people tend to write
> software, test it under MSVC and Fedora's gcc, see it works there, and
> release it.  Current solution of converting #pragma pack (push/pop) to
> mere pack(n)/pack() could lead to potential problems (read: bugs) and
> just isn't The Right Thing(tm).
> 
> Since you asked, I also hope you (or someone else) will upgrade manual
> page for gcc, since it's really outdated for -CURRENT at this moment.
> If memory serves me right, all necessary patches are in existence, and
> probably were submitted to our GCC maintainers already.

Necessary patches, submitted to GCC maintainers are pretty much worthless.
Let me repeat - new GCC man pages are automatically generated and applying
patches to that is something I would never do. Whoever touches them
automatically becomes new GCC documentation maintainer. You have been warned.

--
Alexander Kabaev