Re: Backport criteria

On 09/11/10 06:51, Michael Hope wrote:

I've been going through the ChangeLog for the release and am having trouble justifying some of the changes brought in. In particular:

• -fstrict-volatile-bitfields, which is more appropriate for bare

metal/kernel code

• Cortex-M4 support
• C locale support in libstdc++-v3

These changes were brought in on the (secondary) principle of keeping Sourcery G++ and Linaro GCC as closely related as possible.

There are two main advantages to this policy:

1. Future merges are easier if the sources have not diverged.

2. Each toolchain benefits from the other's testing efforts.

This principle has been acknowledged from the beginning of this project.

Note: the two are *not* exactly the same - some patches that customize SG++ in ways that would not be acceptable upstream have been omitted - but they do not diverge to wildly.

Andrew