Home Original page

Release 2.12

David O'Brien obrien@FreeBSD.org
Thu Oct 25 08:57:00 GMT 2001 
On Thu, Oct 25, 2001 at 12:45:53AM -0700, H . J . Lu wrote:
> But I don't think it will work too well for the FSF binutils. There are
> so many questions:
> 
> 1. How frequently should a FSF release be made?

FreeBSD has been happy with the release schedule 2.10.0 and later.
We are just to the point that a lot of changes have happened in the
main-line, including new important architecture support (ia-64, x64_64), so
it is time for a new major release.  If it weren't for those two new
arches, FreeBSD would be fine with 2.11.2.  (I know someone will say both
of these arches are in 2_11, but they are so new lots of changes are
being made for them and not getting put into the 2_11 branch.)

> 2. Under what condition should a new FSF release be made?

As with p0rn, we may not be able to exactly define it, but we can pretty
much "feel" when it is time.  As we've seen this week everyone "feels" it
is time.


> Testing binutils for Linux is not easy. Testing it for all supported
> platforms is a nightmare. Unless we can come to a consensus based on
> my Linux binutils scheme, I don't think I am the suitable person for
> the FSF binutils release manager.

You personally do not have to do the testing on each and ever platform.
You are "just" the gatekeeper. (it is a big job, thus the "just")
>From your maintenance of your Linux Binutils you can gauge the risk of
changes.  This is the desired quality you bring to being the release
manager.

-- 
-- David  (obrien@FreeBSD.org)
More information about the Binutils mailing list