On Mon, 22 May 2006, Joe Buck wrote:
>> How embarrassing. I'll install the patch below in a minute, since I could
>> not find a true new master site for this FAQ.
> There's a mirror of the old FAQ at
>
> http://vmlinux.org/crash/mirror/www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/
>
> However, it has a 1999 date. I
to sell his services.
How embarrassing. I'll install the patch below in a minute, since I could
not find a true new master site for this FAQ.
Mark, since it seems we'll have to make another try for GCC 4.1.1, okay to
install this there as well?
Gerald
2006-05-20 Gerald Pfeifer <[EMAIL
On Sun, 7 May 2006, Mircea Namolaru wrote:
> 2006-05-07 Mircea Namolaru <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> * opts.c (flag_see): remove its setting at -O3.
gcc/doc/invoke.texi still reads:
@item -fsee
@opindex fsee
Eliminates redundant extension instructions and move the non redundant
ones
On Sat, 13 May 2006, Stefano Repici wrote:
> In order to build it on HP-UX 10.20 Pa-Risc 1.1, could you send me the
> real source, or show me where to find it?
Please refer to our web site at http://gcc.gnu.org; there you will
find a navigation bar with download links.
Gerald
On Sat, 13 May 2006, Bernhard Fischer wrote:
> s/exercize/exercise/ in fixincludes/README
> Please apply.
>
> 2006-05-13 Bernhard Fischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> * README: Fix typo.
Please go ahead and commit this. (BTW, you do not need to Cc:
the gcc list on patches; gcc-patches is jus
On Sat, 13 May 2006, Bernhard Fischer wrote:
> 2006-05-13 Bernhard Fischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> PR/27501
> * mkconfig.sh: Use operator '=' for test
I think you can apply this under our "obvious rule", given the testing
you have done on the affected platform (OSF5.1) and a Linux-b
It is my pleasure to announce that the steering committee has
appointed Richard Guenther libgcc-math maintainer.
Please adjust the MAINTAINERS file accordingly, Richard, and
Happy Hacking!
Gerald
On Sat, 8 Apr 2006, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
>> ftp://ftp.club-internet.fr/pub/gcc/ - severly out of date (3.3 is latest)
> ftpmaster, I just confirmed this. Would you mind having a look and
> letting us know how to proceed?
>
> If this was this a technical glitch, and y
On Fri, 21 Apr 2006, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> Now, where is the TLS data supposed to be handled? Is that in glibc or
>> somewhere else?
> In the dynamic linker, but your glibc is clearly too old.
> The thing on sparc64 is, the assembler TLS (and GCC) support has been added
> many years ago, for 32-b
Dear FTP-admin,
ftp://ftp.eos.hokudai.ac.jp/pub/gcc/ is listed as an official mirror
site of gcc.gnu.org at http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html.
However, for several weeks, DNS queries for ftp.eos.hokudai.ac.jp have
provided MX records, but no A nor CNAME records, which means that the
server/service
On Thu, 20 Apr 2006, Christian Joensson wrote:
>> /usr/bin/ld: .libs/barrier.o: check_relocs: unhandled reloc type 0
>> .libs/barrier.o: could not read symbols: File format not recognized
>> collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
>>
>> I will restart a build and see if I get to the same error, but, if
On Mon, 10 Apr 2006, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> It seems like we're getting consensus around that approach, despite the
> initial sentiment in the other direction from Mike and Joe. Mike, Joe,
> do either of you care to argue the point? If not, I'll volunteer to
> write some text for the web pages, a
On Sun, 9 Apr 2006, Roger Sayle wrote:
> My understanding (which is admittedly mostly personal and historical)
> is that someone is granted write access once they have demonstrated
> an understanding of the rules and policies for submissions to GCC.
This is my understanding as well.
> There does
On Sat, 8 Apr 2006, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
>> That means they mirror from ftp.gnu.org, rather than gcc.gnu.org.
> Right, but should they all be in the same listing?
You're right, they shouldn't.
I believe I know removed all such mirrors, which really do not mirror
gcc.gnu.org but ftp.gnu.org tha
On Sat, 8 Apr 2006, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> I found problems with the following mirrors:
>
> ftp://ftp.funet.fi/pub/mirrors/ - no longer has a GCC mirror
Thanks for the hint; I just removed this server from our mirrors list.
> ftp://ftp.uvsq.fr/pub/gcc/ - unreachable
> ftp://ftp.club-internet.
On Sat, 8 Apr 2006, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html lists a number of mirrors that are no
> longer reachable, doesn't mention that certain mirrors don't have
> snapshots, etc. Can you please investigate.
>
> I found problems with the following mirrors:
> [...]
> ftp://ft
On Sat, 8 Apr 2006, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html lists a number of mirrors that are no
> longer reachable, doesn't mention that certain mirrors don't have
> snapshots, etc. Can you please investigate.
>
> I found problems with the following mirrors:
> [...]
> ftp://ft
in libgomp!
Gerald
2006-04-04 Gerald Pfeifer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* MAINTAINERS: Add Richard Henderson as libgomp maintainer.
Rearrange the entries of other libraries to have them in one place.
In
On Mon, 27 Mar 2006, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> That would be up to the Steering Committee, I suppose. Gerald?
Yes, as Mark noted in a related thread, this would be the case.
Note that it's not only about technical issues, copyright assignment,
and coding standards. Adding and especially carrying
On Sun, 19 Mar 2006, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> Are statistics for GCC download available somewhere? I suspect
> in these days of broadband that just about everyone gets the full
> tarball (especially for releases...).
The FreeSD ports, for example, by default do not build gfortran nor
Java at this p
On Mon, 6 Mar 2006, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
>> It is a bit weird that objcp is included in the gcc-core download. It
>> could be included in the gcc-objc download (or in a separate objcp
>> download). But
> It should go in an objcp download. sourcebuild.texi includes updating
> the release scr
[ gcc-patches -> gcc ]
On Tue, 28 Feb 2006, Mark Mitchell wrote:
>> That said, I guess it's fine to ignore the ones with makeinfo 4.5,
>> but based on my checks I'd be rather hesitant for us to require
>> anything later than 4.6.
> I don't think we should tie our own hands in this way. Building G
On Fri, 24 Feb 2006, John Sullivan via RT wrote:
> I'm doing some housecleaning, and thought I should pass on this rather
> old message to you that we received in the GNU Webmasters queue about
> the sidebar on your web pages.
>
> Can someone acknowledge this? Thanks!
Acknowledged. I installed t
On Sun, 26 Feb 2006, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> Cross building and installing gcc-4.1.0 rc2 (--prefix=/usr/local)
> installs these headers:
>
> /usr/local/include/ssp/unistd.h
> /usr/local/include/ssp/string.h
> /usr/local/include/ssp/ssp.h
> /usr/local/include/ssp/stdio.h
>
> Is this behavior corre
On Mon, 6 Feb 2006, David Edelsohn wrote:
>Andrew> Your attitude towards Joern's request for help with a regression was
>really
>Andrew> what got my over the board. Your suggestion that a primary target was
>more
>Andrew> important even for an enhancement matter than over a regression was
>real
On Tue, 21 Feb 2006, Boris Pereira wrote:
> this link to
> http://gcc.gnu.org/install/build.html
>
> in page
> http://gcc.gnu.org/install/
Thanks for the report, this has been fixed now. (Thanks, Joseph et al!)
Gerald
On Mon, 20 Feb 2006, H. J. Lu wrote:
> 3.81rc1 works much better than 3.80. But my patch for 3.80 no longer
> applies cleanly. Paul is aware of the libjava build problem and is
> working on it.
That's good news, thanks! I'll give 3.81 RC1 a try, and hope we'll
have a release soon...
Gerald
Hi Paolo,
thanks for the patch. I just saw Joseph's okay, but I believe there
is one minor detail left.
On Wed, 22 Feb 2006, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> +GNU Make 3.79 and above, which is necessary to build GCC, support
> +building in parallel.
Specifically, in the sentence above we have "which is"
On Wed, 1 Feb 2006, H. J. Lu wrote:
> My memory hog patch for make has 2 typos. This patch fixes them.
Thanks, H. J. What's the upstream status of your patches? Did you
submit your updated patch there as well?
(As long as this patch, or a similar change, has not become part of a
released versi
On Thu, 2 Feb 2006, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> This is OK for mainline and 4.1.
> Please cite PR target/25864 in the ChangeLog entry.
Personally, and explicitly not speaking for my employer, I fully agree
with Andrew Pinski that this kind of change is not appropriate for GCC
4.1 at this point in the
On Fri, 30 Dec 2005, Jon Brisbin wrote:
> I'm trying to install the GCC 4.1 snapshot from Dec 23, 2005 on my
> FreeBSD box. I'm trying to try out gcj. The installation fails,
> complaining about not enough virtual memory. I just added another 2GB
> swap file on this box. I now have 1GB of physic
Tomas,
On Mon, 2 Jan 2006, Tomas Bily via RT wrote:
> I filled and posted FSF assignment (with an employer disclaimer) back
> to FSF via mail half year ago. Did you received it ?
I found the following in the copyright file on the FSF network:
GCC Tomas Bily United States 2005-
On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'm opening a new branch and would like to request some assistance
> updating the online material. Specifically, how do I add the branch
> information to http://gcc.gnu.org/svn.html#devbranches. Also, would it be
> possible to create an associated pr
On Fri, 16 Dec 2005, Richard Kenner wrote:
>> A wiki page that has the mapping from the old style to the new style
>> targets is appropriate. I know that I'll hit the, what is x called
>> now, and I too will be at a loss. Going back and reading the email
>> archives to find it would be
On Wed, 14 Dec 2005, Mike Stump wrote:
> :-( I think we should remove all traces of any search that doesn't work.
I agree with that and plan to do so next week, once the server hosting
my GCC trees is online again.
> It has never been any good, so I don't think it is a real loss.
This is not fa
On Fri, 16 Dec 2005, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Yes. "make bubblestrap" is now called simply "make".
Okay, how is "make bootstrap-lean" called these days? ;-)
In fact, bootstrap-lean is still documented in install.texi and
makefile.texi, but it no longer seems to be present in the Makefile
machiner
On Sun, 4 Dec 2005, Mark Wielaard wrote:
>> 2005-09-21 Mark Wielaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>> * lib/split-for-gcj.sh: Cut list to 3 package levels deep.
> I reversed this (patch attached) and now my build with ulimit -v45
> passes. But the total virtual memory usage didn't drop that
On Tue, 6 Dec 2005, David Daney wrote:
> After the 4.1 branch was created there appears to be no way to navigate to:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.1/changes.html
>
> from the gcc.gnu.org home page.
Now there is. ;-)
Thanks for the hint; I just installed the patch below.
Gerald
Index: index.h
On Fri, 9 Dec 2005, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> The branch is open for regression fixes only as I restated in the Dec
> 1st message. Do you have a particular patch in mind that did not fix
> a regression?
Most of Volker's patches didn't state they were regression fixes on the
gcc-patches submission
On Tue, 6 Dec 2005, Diego Novillo wrote:
> Yes, they're collectively pretty clueless. However, in the midst of
> that /. interchange I did see one posting that made a relatively good
> point: If you go to gcc.gnu.org, you will see "Current release series:
> GCC 4.1.0".
>
> For the uninformed,
On Wed, 7 Dec 2005, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> As in the previous round, please consider every weekly snapshot from
> gcc-3_4-branch as a release candidate for testing.
>
> Schedule:
>
>The tentative release date is end of February 2006.
>
>I'll make official prerelease tarballs on Februa
On Tue, 6 Dec 2005, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>| I also notice we have a "Releases" link under "About GCC" in the top
>| left corner of the main GCC page that doesn't look like it has been
>| updated in quite a while for any releases. Should this be updated or
>| removed?
> As for 4.x, it is not cle
On Sun, 4 Dec 2005, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> We try really hard not to disrupt the normal flow of GCC development.
> For any large build/integration changes we contact Mark Mitchell as
> release manager, but should probably also more often post a note to the
> main gcc list in the future.
That would
On Sun, 4 Dec 2005, FX Coudert wrote:
> PS: I'm amazed that a "GNU project" can have exactly two developers,
> release source snapshots every two years, adopt the too common attitude
> of "every non-i686-linux platform is not mainstream", and so on.
There is a difference in focus between the Fre
Is anyone seeing this? With current 4.1 sources, on a machine with "only"
1GB of main memory + 1GB swap, the following part of `make install`
Adding java source files from srcdir '/cvs/gcc/trunk/libjava/classpath'.
Adding java source files from VM directory /cvs/gcc/trunk/libjava
/tmp/OBJ-120
On Wed, 23 Nov 2005, Eric J. Goforth wrote:
> I misunderstood what this list was for and ended up on it. No
> instructions on the messages on how to get off and I don't' remember
> where I went to get on.. Can someone point me? Thanks.
Every message on this list carries the following headers:
I installed the two patches below, in lign with your status report
and plans for 3.4.5 and 3.4.6.
Gerald
Index: index.html
===
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/index.html,v
retrieving revision 1.527
diff -u -3 -p -r1.527 index.html
Hi Anton,
On Tue, 18 Oct 2005, Anton Titov wrote:
> I've set up a new gcc mirror in Sofia, Bulgaria
>
> ftp://mirrors.host.bg/gnu/ftp/gnu/gcc/
> http://mirrors.host.bg/gnu/ftp/gnu/gcc/
as far as I can see this is a mirror of ftp.gnu.org, not gcc.gnu.org?
Note that on our mirror lists we only ma
On Wed, 16 Nov 2005, Osku Salerma wrote:
> Not sure what you mean by "have the branches locally" (SVK?), but a
> plain rename of a branch doesn't force new check-outs, people can use
> svn switch to point their working copies at the new branch name.
As far as I can experienced, svn switch does hav
On Mon, 14 Nov 2005, Diego Novillo wrote:
> Gerald, is this patch OK for svn.html?
Sure! Thanks for the summary and the patch, Diego.
(I believe someone still needs to update projects/ia64.html; as far
as I can see, it's quite a bit out of date...)
Gerald
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> If I compile source code using GCC, that does not require me to
>> open-source the resulting program under the GPL, correct?
> Compiling a program with GCC does not by itself cause the resulting
> executable to be covered by the GNU General Public Licen
On Sun, 16 Oct 2005, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> I should probably note again that i don't plan to convert wwwdocs to svn
> right now, because the checkout scripts are a bit hard to follow, etc.
Per se there doesn't seem to be as much of an advantage for wwwdocs
as we had for gcc (no branches, most c
On Fri, 27 Oct 2005, Tom Tromey wrote:
>> our configure/build system really should be clever enough to
>> automatically set pkgdatadir to the correct value in the first
>> place: $(prefix)/libdata/pkgconfig on FreeBSD, and $(libdir)/pkgconfig
>> elsewhere.
> Are there other places where we try to
On Fri, 28 Oct 2005, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> I just updated the cvs/svn shell on gcc.gnu.org. It now has the ability
> to add a v2 key to the system:
>
> ssh gcc.gnu.org 'updatekey' < ~/.ssh/id_rsa.pub
>
> This will add the id_rsa.pub to the authorized_keys file on gcc.gnu.org.
> It will,
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/SvnSetup has the following example for
checking out the GCC sources under "Checking out a tree"
svn co svn+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk
but this doesn't work for me. Rather, I'm getting:
% svn co svn+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk
Permission denied (publickey
On Thu, 20 Oct 2005, Richard Guenther wrote:
> If it is at all possible we should probably try to keep read-only CVS
> working (and up-to-date) for HEAD and release-branches.
That would be great. It would allow me to continue my nightly bootstraps
on some guest account without interruption.
On
On Sat, 15 Oct 2005, Frank Ned wrote:
> I have space to mirror GCC.
>
> What I need do to contribut with GCC project?
>
> name of the server: absoluta.org
> path to the GCC mirror: /gcc
> country/city: Brazil/BrasÃlia
Thanks for the offer to mirror our site. http://absoluta.org/gcc does not
se
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005, Kaz Kojima wrote:
> Ah. There is no room to include all, though. :-) How about
>
> sh libraries/configuryKaz Kojima [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> ?
Looks fine.
Gerald
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005, Kaz Kojima wrote:
> Like this?
Yes -- and you can also include configure.gcc and Makefiles. ;-)
Gerald
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005, Kaz Kojima wrote:
> BTW, where is the appropriate place to add it in the MAINTAINERS
> file? Is it enough to modify the currnet line like this?:
The current line is under "OS Ports"; have you considered adding a
new, third line for sh to the "CPU Port Maintainers" section?
Ge
In accordance with the two maintainers of the sh port (Alexandre
Oliva and Joern Rennecke) the steering committee is happy to extend
Kaz Kojima's maintainership from the current sh-linux-gnu to also
include "sh: libraries, configure.gcc, Makefiles".
Congratulations, Kaz! Would you mind updating y
On Thu, 22 Sep 2005, george young wrote:
> On the web page:
>http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html
>
> the link:
> http://strawberry.resnet.mtu.edu/pub/gcc/
>
> fails: "The requested URL /pub/gcc/ was not found on this server"
Thanks for the hint!
Paul, shall I remove the link from our mirrors
On Sun, 4 Sep 2005, Peter O'Gorman wrote:
>| We currently perform the following sequence of commands as part of the
>| installation (-m 444 being the default on current FreeBSD systems).
> I can not see where freebsd could be getting a -m 444 from. The libraries
> are always installed with INSTALL_
On Thu, 22 Sep 2005, Tom Tromey wrote:
> I think it depends a lot on timing; the sooner 4.1 ships the less
> inclined I would be to do another import. I want to see 4.1 ship with
> a reasonably up-to-date class library, though; for one thing the more
> recent the library, the more apps we can run.
On Fri, 2 Sep 2005, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> Huh? What does "Red Hat" have to do with anything? "Red Hat" doesn't
> provide the tools. Cygwin is a volunteer effort.
According to http://cygwin.com/license.html (and the link from there)
Red Hat does provide tools for some set of users at least
On Mon, 19 Sep 2005, Giovanni Bajo wrote:
>> I see that I reviewed it with two days back then. Not everything I
>> could/can approve as web pages maintainer (because it looks like
>> policy changes), but I see that about half of the changes I only
>> had minor editorial comments on.
>>
>> Would yo
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005, Giovanni Bajo wrote:
> I suggest you to double check also the list present in this mail:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-06/msg01625.html
>
> This was never publically approved, but it reflects views of many GCC
> maintainers. Surely it does not hurt to follow those g
On Tue, 30 Aug 2005, Nix wrote:
>> mudflap is an offender as well, see Bugzilla #18244 (libmudflap
>> installs include/mf-runtime.h in version-independent path).
>>
>> Java has libdata/pkgconfig/libgcj.pc and include/ffi.h.
>>
>> And, like the man pages, the info files do not honor --program-suff
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> It may of course be necessary to make changes to the live crontab for
> testing before checking them in, but once tested they should be posted to
> gcc-patches and checked in.
I agree. That was a temporary workaround I had to do and then I failed
to
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> In summary, I think that splitting GCC optimization efforts between FSF
> and ORC back-ends is unfortunate. I would far rather that the free
> software community be united behind a single optimizer. But,
> fundamentally, I don't see much that we can do
On Fri, 9 Sep 2005, Jonathan wrote:
> i could become a mirror if you want
>
> i'm from rome italy
> the server is in Arezzo Italy
>
> i have 3 domains that you could mirror though if u wanted
> let me know please :)
>
> win.ac3bf1.com
> lnx.ac3bf1.com
> rjn.it
>
> P.S. = send me the files t
On Thu, 1 Sep 2005, Peter O'Gorman wrote:
> Another alternative would be to set RANLIB=: before configure if your
> system does not need to ranlib anything.
Thanks for the nice hint - this is what the FreeBSD Ports Collection
now uses for the lang/gcc34 to lang/gcc41 ports. ;-)
On Fri, 2 Sep 200
On Wed, 31 Aug 2005, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
ranlib is basically never required on a modern system. It is really
only needed if the archive is built with the S option to ar.
>>> If you consider Darwin "modern", then that statement is not correct
>>> as moving/copying an archive on darwin
Installed.
Gerald
Index: index.html
===
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/index.html,v
retrieving revision 1.514
diff -u -3 -p -r1.514 index.html
--- index.html 24 Aug 2005 19:04:13 - 1.514
+++ index.html 31 Aug 2005 19:24
We currently perform the following sequence of commands as part of the
installation (-m 444 being the default on current FreeBSD systems).
install -m 444 ./libgcc.a
/prefix/lib/gcc/i386-portbld-freebsd5.4/3.4.5/gcc/i386-portbld-freebsd5.4/3.4.5/
ranlib
/prefix/lib/gcc/i386-portbld-freebsd5.
On Fri, 26 Aug 2005, Nix wrote:
> This is nonsense. I have a dozen cross-compilers on this box, all
> installed into /usr. They do not collide as long as you configure with
> --enable-version-specific-runtime-libs and
> --program-{prefix,suffix,transform-name} and make slight adjustments
> after in
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> This should been already fixed by:
> 2005-08-15 Sebastian Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> PR 23386
> [...]
> What is happening here is we were miss-compiling a finite loop to be an
> infinite loop.
Thanks for the pointer, Andrew.
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005
On i386-unknown-freebsd4.10 I started to see the following part of the
bootstrap go into an endless loop (that is, not terminating after more
than a day and being killed via a system ulimit):
ASM_HIDDEN_OP='' \
GCC_FOR_TARGET=' ./xgcc -B./ -B/sw/gcc-current/i386-unknown-freebsd4.10/bin/
-isyste
On Fri, 5 Aug 2005, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>> I guess the web pages should be updated with something like the attached?
Yes...
> This looks fine to me. Thanks! Perhaps even cvs.html should mention
> that tree-profiling was almost fully merged and retired?
...and, yes. ;-)
Minor comments for the o
On Sun, 31 Jul 2005, Steve Kargl wrote:
>> I was waiting for a gfortran maintainer to comment -- if it's fine
>> with them, it surely is fine with me.
> The patch is fine. I was going to commit it, but real life
> has taken over and gfortran is way down the list of important
> things to do.
It's
On Sun, 31 Jul 2005, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> For code.
> I have never seen such claims made for documentation, since it's much
> easier to remove and deal with infringing docs than code.
I have seen such statements, by RMS himself.
Gerald
On Mon, 18 Jul 2005, Brooks Moses wrote:
>> As per a recent conversation with Steve Kargl on the fortran list, I'm
>> submitting this patch, which adds a small "Documentation" section to
>> the gfortran "home page", right below the "Binaries" section.
> Oh, bother. I just noticed that I failed to
On Sun, 31 Jul 2005, Daniel Berlin wrote:
>> We may to want to wait until we hear about the outcome of discussion
>> on the copyright (assignment) aspects of the Wiki vs wwwdocs and gcc/doc,
> We are not the first nor the last project to have a wiki that needs to
> move documentation from the wiki
On Fri, 15 Jul 2005, Tom Tromey wrote:
>> The FAQ is badly in need of an update - in fact, it should be moved
>> over to the Wiki (http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/GCJ) in order to be easier
>> to update and maintain.
> Great idea, I agree.
> We've had a lot of trouble with bit-rot of the main pages over th
On Wed, 27 Jul 2005, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> Jack Howarth pointed out to me that when you look at the archives for
> the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/current/,
> you get this header:
>
> This is the mail archive of the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list for the
> Fortran 9
On Fri, 22 Jul 2005, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> We have been in Stage 3 for a little while now. I'm sure a few more
> patches that were proposed in Stage 2 will find their way into 4.1,
> but we're approximately feature-complete at this point.
I just committed the following update for our main page.
On Tue, 19 Jul 2005, FX Coudert wrote:
>> Don't folk run the gfortran testsuite???
> No. People don't regtest with gfortran enabled. That's a pity, since it only
> adds little time to the total build and testing time.
I believe on of the reasons people often do not build with gfortran
enabled is
Installed. If you prefer a different summary (I haven't changed the
existing one), please let me know.
Gerald
Index: index.html
===
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/index.html,v
retrieving revision 1.508
diff -u -3 -p -r1.508 index
On Mon, 18 Jul 2005, Tom Tromey wrote:
>> his weekend 4.1 snapshot installs two new info files,
>> hacking.info and vmintegration.info.
> We don't want these. I'll disable this one way or another.
Great, thanks.
> I have a few other minor cleanup fixes from this merge too; I'll get
> them all in
On Sat, 16 Jul 2005, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> How about now?
Thanks for the update, Dan!
I saw that I had forgot to preapprove this in my previous message, so I
went ahead an installed the patch right away (after updating the date and
removing the "Thanks" part which we haven't doing historically
This weekend 4.1 snapshot installs two new info files, hacking.info and
vmintegration.info.
I believe these are related to the classpath import last week. Do we
really want/need these installed as part of a regular GCC install? If
so, are the names sufficiently conflict-free? What happens, if
On Thu, 30 Jun 2005, Mike Stump wrote:
> I had a friend call up and ask where he could find the gcc-4.0.0 tarball. I
> did a quick survey of the GNU FTP mirrors and only 1 out of the first 7 had
> gcc-4.0.0 on it. :-( At least some of the GNU mirrors aren't carrying
> gcc-4.0.0.
Is the situatio
On Sun, 17 Jul 2005, D. Hugh Redelmeier wrote:
> If GCC4 causes this much problem with X, I wonder what GCC4 will do to
> the Linux kernel.
Current combinations of the Linux kernel and GCC 4.0 seem to work just
fine, as far as I can tell.
Gerald
On Sat, 16 Jul 2005, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> No, I have no such plan. (And the branch has seen no much development
> recently)
But you still plan on working on it later? Do you think cvs.html
could be updated, one way or the other to reflect the current status
and plans?
Gerald
On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> Unless we are going to require reviewing for wiki changes now, too,
> there is no point in this entire discussion.
I beg to disagree: first, we again raised the GFDL issue with RMS,
we may have some new volunteers to help with web pages/documentation,
On Tue, 12 Jul 2005, Franz Fritsche wrote:
> The page http://gcc.gnu.org/releases.html should be updated.
> - Entries of recent releases GCC 4.0.0 and GCC 4.0.1 are missing.
>
> In addition the headline of the table should be changed to:
> "Please refer to our development plan for releases past 4.
On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> Another idea that was coined on IRC is to have reviewing and commit
> after approval rules for the user manual, but to allow patches to the
> internals manual in without review. Is that something people are
> willing to consider and discuss?
I think t
On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, Giovanni Bajo wrote:
>> Perhaps the wiki could automatically send all changes to gcc-patches to
>> assist in review?
> I strongly support this (and was going to suggest this myself). I'd rather
> it be another list though, say wiki-patches or doc-patches, because of the
> amoun
On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>> It was reviewed the very same day it was submitted:
>>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-06/msg00313.html
>>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-06/msg00321.html
> where you said:
>> (and possibly to your tutorial as a separate page if
>>
On Sun, 10 Jul 2005, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> HowToPrepareATestcase was submitted but never reviewed which is why it
> moved to the wiki.
It was reviewed the very same day it was submitted:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-06/msg00313.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-06/msg0032
701 - 800 of 874 matches
Mail list logo
