4 ms·

> Fixing GCC 4.9 to address this bug is out of the question; the GCC developers have long since moved on from that release. I really don't understand why that

> Fixing GCC 4.9 to address this bug is out of the question; the GCC developers have long since moved on from that release. I really don't understand why that is. 4.9.x is the last release branch in the 4 series, so it's not as though there is another 4-series branch to maintain. And 4.9.0 came out in 2014. I don't see why it is out of the question to release 4.9.5 - with the patch already having been backported to 4.9.4 by others; and the fact that there's no change in library API, command-line arguments etc. Now, perhaps it is the case that GCC doesn't have enough manpower to support releases for 6 years. But doing so can't just be dismissed as "out of the question". Compilers are very fundamental pieces of software - perhaps no less than OS kernels - and they shouldn't just be "moved on" from.

CJefferson 6y ago
If there was "just one bug", that might be possible, but there are probably dozens or even hundreds of bugs fixed in newer versions of GCC which effect 4.9.x. Someone would have to figure out which bugs are in 4.9.x, backport the patches (which could be hard if significant changes have occurred). As you say, it could in principle be done, but GCC doesn't have a huge amount of funding (most companies support LLVM/clang if they support any compiler, which to be honest makes a lot of sense, they are much more business-friendly)
guenthert 6y ago
I don't think that developers in general have great interest in maintaining obsolete code which would only cause some users to continue using that old code, perpetuating the maintenance headache. Money buys you that interest, but in the free software world you better move along with the developers.
- einpoklum 6y ago
  > I don't think that developers in general have great interest in maintaining obsolete code which would only cause some users to continue using that old code, perpetuating the maintenance headache. Well, you know, if you're in a project central to a lot of the FOSS world, then there's a mix of doing exciting new features and doing maintenance. Plus, if you just think of "fixing a compiler bug" as "fixing it on the N versions we're currently supporting", it may feel as less of a pain than "backporting a bunch of bug fixes". > Money buys you that interest, but in the free software world you better move along with the developers. Hey, I'm in the free software world. I maintained a Seamonkey 1.x version of an extension of mine until last year - 13 years after the last significant release (1.1).

CJefferson 6y ago

If there was "just one bug", that might be possible, but there are probably dozens or even hundreds of bugs fixed in newer versions of GCC which effect 4.9.x. Someone would have to figure out which bugs are in 4.9.x, backport the patches (which could be hard if significant changes have occurred). As you say, it could in principle be done, but GCC doesn't have a huge amount of funding (most companies support LLVM/clang if they support any compiler, which to be honest makes a lot of sense, they are much more business-friendly)

guenthert 6y ago

I don't think that developers in general have great interest in maintaining obsolete code which would only cause some users to continue using that old code, perpetuating the maintenance headache. Money buys you that interest, but in the free software world you better move along with the developers.

einpoklum 6y ago
> I don't think that developers in general have great interest in maintaining obsolete code which would only cause some users to continue using that old code, perpetuating the maintenance headache. Well, you know, if you're in a project central to a lot of the FOSS world, then there's a mix of doing exciting new features and doing maintenance. Plus, if you just think of "fixing a compiler bug" as "fixing it on the N versions we're currently supporting", it may feel as less of a pain than "backporting a bunch of bug fixes". > Money buys you that interest, but in the free software world you better move along with the developers. Hey, I'm in the free software world. I maintained a Seamonkey 1.x version of an extension of mine until last year - 13 years after the last significant release (1.1).