[cfe-dev] 2.7 still has regressions

[Tanya Lattner]

On Apr 5, 2010, at 11:22 AM, R P Herrold wrote:

> On Mon, 5 Apr 2010, Tanya Lattner wrote:
> 
>> All,
>> 
>> We need to get all regressions fixed before 2.7 can continue onto pre-release2.
>> 
>> Please take a look at all release blockers:
>> http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=6586
>> 
>> At this point, the release is delayed until further notice. If no bugs get fixed this week, then I see no other solution but to cancel the release or only qualify it for darwin (the only platform that is regression free).
>> 
>> Linux developers, please help us out. We need more people fixing bugs!
> 
> Umm -- The remaining blocker bugs in that ticket are:
> 	6616 - warnings -- not a bar to release as I understood the release criteria

They are. We release without warnings.

> 	6654 - a mish-mash of issues in a single bug, some seemingly related to deficiencies in the test suite code assignments

These are all valid regressions. Sure, its in a single bug (which I asked it to be separated out), but still they are regressions.

> 	6696 - as I read it, a grey area as to proper behaviour, and not really a Linux issue so much as a correctness as to alignment issue under x86-64

Its still a regression. The problem itself may not be Linux specific, but it was only found on Linux on that test case.

> 	6725 - a possible optional test, either proposed as blocking or non-blocking

It was declared a release blocker.

> 	6778 - a Darwin issue as to Fortran test coverage
> 
> I don't see that segmenting the release's scope to Darwin only is either accurate, nor that Darwin buildout is without regressions
> 

Darwin is currently compiling without warnings or errors. It also has no regressions in the test-suite or dejagnu test suite for both clang and llvm-gcc. So by our release criteria, it is currently the only platform that is regression free. I'd like Linux to be ready to release too, but if no one is helping fix bugs, then there isnt much I can do about it.

Please help fix what you can.

Thanks,
Tanya

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20100405/11fcb5bf/attachment.html>