GCC 4.4.4 is out: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2010-04/msg01018.html There is no ebuild in portage. I assume that GCC 4.4.x is old news considering that GCC 4.5.0 is out, but GCC 4.4.x is a more stable compiler, so bug fix releases of it should still be made available in portage. Reproducible: Always
Believe me, gcc-4.4 is being tracked as well even when gcc-4.5 is interesting, if not for other reasons only because it will take some time to have everything in portage ready for gcc-4.5 (it is not even keyworded yet) and during that time we need something that is stable. Now GCC 4.4.4 was release 2010-04-29[1], that is just 4 days ago. Considering what needs to be done for each release of gcc as working trough the patchsets to see what patches are still needed, and which of them needs to be reworked to apply to the new release, compile it with those patches and see if it breaks common things before being uploaded, 4 days start too look more like a zero-day bump request, and those are really not well liked. I do not say this bump request is a bad thing (even if it may come a bit early), but please in the future do consider how you formulate yourself as your comment can be interpreted as a attack on the maintainers for being slow and ignoreing the 4.4.4 release. That is a bad thing. [1] http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.4/
GCC 4.5.0 has had a great deal of attention, even before it was released, with an overlay being available for people to install it: http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-806781.html Since GCC 4.4.4 is no where to be found, I did not think a bump request would hurt things.
(In reply to comment #2) > Since GCC 4.4.4 is no where to be found, I did not think a bump request would > hurt things. > Read my comment again, especially the part about: (In reply to comment #1) > I do not say this bump request is a bad thing (even if it may come a bit > early), but please in the future do consider how you formulate yourself as your > comment can be interpreted as a attack on the maintainers for being slow and > ignoreing the 4.4.4 release. That is a bad thing. The last part was because of the following part from your first comment which actually makes it sound like you do not think the toolchain maintainers care about a minor.minor version of a package when a minor version has been released (which is historically not true). (In reply to comment #0) > There is no ebuild in portage. I assume that GCC 4.4.x is old news considering > that GCC 4.5.0 is out, but GCC 4.4.x is a more stable compiler, so bug fix > releases of it should still be made available in portage. There is also a possibility that almost all changes between gcc-4.4.3 and 4.4.4 already is in the gentoo patchset (or does not touch gentoo), so they may not feel that "whoooo, gcc-4.4.4 is out, lets bump it now", as much as "we need to fix this first because it breaks mayor, lets bump gcc when we find the time. (In reply to comment #2) > GCC 4.5.0 has had a great deal of attention, even before it was released, with > an overlay being available for people to install it: You seems to have misinterpreted the reason for the overlay, it is not there for people to be able to install GCC 4.5 as much as for people help make the packages in the portage tree ready for the new version of GCC, as many packages needs fixes when there is such a big bump for GCC. Then there are those who installs it without being one of those, but there are people who like shooting themselves in their feets all the time also. The bottom line is that a bumprequest is not wrong. But 4 days is a short time before starting to make accusations about a version not getting the attention you think it deserves, because it may be "old news", and my experience tells me that those kind of lines provokes maintainers to not work on a package more then making them bump the package sooner. Also, a bug report really is not the place for this discussion.
(as a side note) I know 'early' bump request are considered 'bad', but it has at least one great benefit for us users : we can add ourselves to the cc: to monitor things (most importantly, when it is added to the tree). And this is great :-)
It was released today, according to the release email that arrived in my inbox. It's not like we're going to miss it.
For what is worth, I've bumped the ebuild from 4.4.3-r2 manually by copying with the same patchset (PATCH_VER="1.2" UCLIBC_VER="1.0"). All the patches apply cleanly and I was able to do an emerge -e1 @world without any failures. I'm on ~amd64.
4.4.3 contains some severe ICE that hurts here.... when can we expect this bump ? It seems pretty trivial, isn't it ? I can't find any blocker in buzilla..? It's been released >20days ago.
I'd love to see a gcc-4.4.4 in portage. Hey toolchain ninjas, is this version on your todo list or do we have to bump it ourselves locally?
if Mark/Ryan arent working on it now, i'll see about getting it updated this week
Sorry, I'm working 12-14h days right now.
Created attachment 234159 [details, diff] gcc-4.4.4.ebuild.patch For all the brave users who are keen on having this version of gcc installed. Just add this tiny little line into a renamed ebuild and you should be able to install gcc-4.4.4
any news ? Adding a masked ebuild with the stuff in comment #11 would suit most of us i think. And we could report emerge results.
now in the tree
thanks a lot, works perfectly here!
