http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59009
Michael Meissner <meissner at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |meissner at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 from Michael Meissner <meissner at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
It has been a week since you broke the build for powerpc64 and other targets.
Please immediately revert these patches to allow the ports to build while you
work on patches that will not break on the major host/targets.
Quoting from the GCC development plan.
If a patch is committed which introduces a regression on any target which the
Steering Committee considers to be important and if:
the problem is reported to the original poster;
48 hours pass without the original poster or any other party indicating that a
fix will be forthcoming in the very near future;
two people with write privileges to the affected area of the compiler determine
that the best course of action is to revert the patch;
then they may revert the patch.
(The list of important targets will be revised at the beginning of each release
cycle, if necessary, and is part of the release criteria.)
After the patch has been reverted, the poster may appeal the decision to the
Steering Committee.
Note that no distinction is made between patches which are themselves buggy and
patches that expose latent bugs elsewhere in the compiler.
