Message-ID:	<002901c30999$30fbcb00$0100a8c0@acp42g>
From:	"Andrew Cottrell" <acottrel AT ihug DOT com DOT au>
To:	<djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com>, "Richard Dawe" <rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
References:	<3EA65605 DOT D387FADA AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
Subject:	Re: 2.04 status page / 2.04 alpha 1 release schedule
Date:	Wed, 23 Apr 2003 23:06:44 +1000
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Priority:	3
X-MSMail-Priority:	Normal
X-Mailer:	Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE:	Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

> Please could people check the 2.04 status page, to make sure that I
haven't
> forgotten any issues:
>
>     http://www.phekda.freeserve.co.uk/richdawe/djgpp/2.04/status204.html
>
Now for my 2cents worth:-

2.04 specific
-------------
1) The Bash 2.05 issue could be a priority #2. This will be fixed once the
2.04 alpha release is done as the Bash 2.05 will be released with it.
2) The Rhide crashing issue could be a priority 3 as you just start it
again. The text can be changed to the following:-
    "On Windows 2000 and XP use Rhide 1.5.0.1 or later, do not use Rhide
1.4.x. Rhide ocassionaly crashes on Windows 2000 and XP."
3) Update to the latest find & which could be a priority #2. These will be
fixed once the 2.04 alpha release is done. I do not want to
spend time on getting the old versions built.
4) The 2.04 symlink issue could be broken into two items and the first one
moved to fixed. (less still open)

Not 2.04 specific, but could be fixed in it
-------------------------------------------
1) The linker script issues - C++ support, DWARF-2 debug info issues?
    I thought this was fixed, see the resolved issues with regards to GCC
3.2.1 and GDB 5.2.1
2) The fstat and stat inode issue may be one in the same. I am only aware of
the fstat inode problem being
   a problem. The email reference in the stat inode turned out to be almost
correct, but the problem was in fstat.
3) Charles sent out a potential fix for the uclock issue. See the following
URL:-

http://www.delorie.com/djgpp/mail-archives/browse.cgi?p=djgpp-workers/2003/0
3/09/22:02:19
4) The issue of smaller images is either allready resolved or is the UPX
issue. By this I mean that a binary
   package turns out to be almost the same size if the exe's are zipped or
are UPX'd and then zipped. As
   we allready zip the packages up then they are small, but when expanded
they do take up more space than
   if they wer UPX'd. The problem is that currently there is no beta or
release version of UPX that supports
   the current DJGPP exe file format (when Binutils 2.13 is used). The next
release of UPX shoulf fix this.
    As such I think this issue can be removed / assimilated into the UPX
issue that is not specific to 2.04.
5) With regards to the Perl problems. Have these been fixed in your Perl
5.6.1 releases this year?

Not 2.04 specific
-----------------
1) The UPX issue is Binutils related and not GCC related.
2) I have a spreadsheet available for download at clio that lists the
various FSF versions against what
    DJGPP is using. We are behind in allot of packages.
    You did a libttool release a few days ago...doh...

Not DJGPP specific
------------------
1) Could you add the following link for the GDB and binutils bug. This will
make tracking it easier.

http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&databas
e=gdb&pr=591


Andrew

- Raw text -