Mailing-List: contact dev-help@harmony.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@harmony.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of rdasgupt@gmail.com designates
 64.233.184.239 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=CF/f0j7y4vcPNz30YTho1tgnmWyFEx52N4435S/NOAOsRRXVBeRKUvddAT7lci5O1EfDDyOU+FLucMsRNzhc8ge2V/m5emY4DHIqH4mlMZv/nN712WcNptuq6PrECeFRtD0NZSzY5pPx+YKWBDGvhhfn5gDaTS4sEwA/VDLdPXQ=
Message-ID: <51d555c70705040850t52765e3q14d4ee661a1282cc@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2007 08:50:50 -0700
From: "Rana Dasgupta" <rdasgupt@gmail.com>
To: dev@harmony.apache.org
Subject: Re: [snapshot] Freeze status
In-Reply-To: <6e47b64f0704292226u2f0878e8n7523c6aaac924a9b@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <4634A28F.4060808@gmail.com>
	 <6e47b64f0704290720r8a192ffs8ee29cc9d9ad3a2@mail.gmail.com>
	 <4634C23C.2070806@gmail.com>
	 <6e47b64f0704292020u4de5197yae48d45adb93ac94@mail.gmail.com>
	 <6e47b64f0704292226u2f0878e8n7523c6aaac924a9b@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,
 We have published two different snapshots for 32 bit Linux builds
with libstdc++.so.5 and so.6, but only so.6 snapshots with 64 bit
builds. I understand that this was a problem for a couple of users
using slightly older versions of gcc. so.5 and so.6 is more a toolset
and not a platform issue, and unfortunately 64 bit does not seem to
imply new toolsets etc.
 It's quite likely that we have discussed this already on other
threads, and I was not following along.

Thanks,
Rana


On 4/29/07, Stepan Mishura <stepan.mishura@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/30/07, Stepan Mishura <stepan.mishura@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 4/29/07, Tim Ellison wrote:
> > > Stepan Mishura wrote:
> > > > On 4/29/07, Tim Ellison wrote:
> > > >> It looks like a number of people have been testing the stable build
> > > >> candidate (thanks to everyone!) and so far it seems that there are no
> > > >> show stoppers for declaring this a good stable build.  It's our best so
> > > >> far, albeit with known problems etc.
> > > >>
> > > >> Unless anything serious come to light by tomorrow, I suggest we declare
> > > >> this our M1, and reopen the code for ongoing development.
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > Does it make sense to rebuilding M1 with debug info in class files
> > > > included?
> > >
> > > Yes, if you could upload a new set of builds at the current repository
> > > state that would be great.  That would include the debug info now, and
> > > no additional functional change.  We can look at refining the JRE vs JDK
> > > info after M1.
> > >
> >
> > OK. I'm going to create snapshots for r533500.
> >
>
> Done
>
> > -Stepan.
> >
>
>
> --
> Stepan Mishura
> Intel Enterprise Solutions Software Division
>