[Buildroot] gcc-error with latest buildroot

[Michael S. Zick]

On Sat December 26 2009, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> First of all, could you please stop being aggressive and offensive ?
> 
> Le Sat, 26 Dec 2009 13:58:06 -0600,
> "Michael S. Zick" <minimod at morethan.org> a écrit :
> 
> > > (Note: of course this is something we should fix, but having gcc and
> > > associated development files on the target is an unusual setup,
> > > that's why it isn't widely tested)
> > > 
> > 
> > Say what?
> > How can you know that?
> 
> Because the feature has existed for years and until a few days/weeks
> ago, no one reported the issue and no one stepped in to fix it. Which
> means that no one was seriously using it.
> 
> > So unless you have some other means of tracking user submitted test 
> > reports how can you say that something is "not widely tested"?
> 
> Users facing issues are invited to report them in the bugzilla.
> However, we cannot guarantee any specific response time, Buildroot is a
> community effort. Bugs are fixed depending on developer
> interest, availability and patches provided by other developers.
> 
> If you want guarantees, please contract a commercial support. I'd be
> happy to provide one through the company I'm working for (Free
> Electrons).
> 
> Please note that I'm not happy to see features broken in Buildroot and
> I very much would like the gcc on target issue fixed. But this is not a
> reason for being offensive.
> 

Requesting that a posted bug, posted 2 weeks before a release gets a:
"depends on Broken" in the config file is offensive?

And that GCC bug in the bug tracker is much older than that.

I don't see how asking for a "depends on Broken" is offensive for that
or any other pending open bug.  Just responsible behavior.

As a matter of fact, that can be your first 30 day 2009.11 "bug fix" -
add "depends on Broken" to everything broken in 2009.11

If that request offends someone, then that is just a matter of personal viewpoint.

Mike
> Cheers,
> 
> Thomas