On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 6:51 PM, David Edelsohn wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 6:18 PM, Kevin Bowling
> wrote:
>
>> This is an unfortunate attitude many people have in free software
>> these days, especially big business contributors with profit-aligned
>> motives. Linus weighs in on a simila
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 7:07 PM, Kevin Bowling wrote:
> My argument is simply this, sorry if it wasn't clear in the last
> email, bottom line up front:
> - It can just as easily be removed in the future if it is broken for
> more than one release rather than evicting support.
> - It shouldn't add
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 6:18 PM, Kevin Bowling wrote:
> This is an unfortunate attitude many people have in free software
> these days, especially big business contributors with profit-aligned
> motives. Linus weighs in on a similar dissent here:
> http://lwn.net/Articles/339455/.
This is just
Jonathan Corbet writes:
> On Tue, 29 Jun 2010 09:39:11 -0700
> Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
>> I am doing what I can. However, looking at other projects doesn't help
>> very much because most other projects simply don't worry about these
>> issues. That is, for example, why the Linux kernel was v
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 4:07 PM, Kevin Bowling wrote:
> My argument is simply this, sorry if it wasn't clear in the last
> email, bottom line up front:
> - It can just as easily be removed in the future if it is broken for
> more than one release rather than evicting support.
> - It shouldn't add
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 3:35 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On 6/30/10, Kevin Bowling wrote:
>>> GCC's mission is not to
>>> support every system in a computer history museum. Older versions of
>>> GCC created at the time of those systems still will work on those
>>> systems.
>>>
>>
>>
>> This is
Snapshot gcc-4.4-20100629 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.4-20100629/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.4 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
On 29 June 2010 18:11, Basile Starynkevitch wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-06-29 at 12:50 -0400, Diego Novillo wrote:
>>
>> Why don't we cross that bridge when we get to it?
>
> [I am not sure to understand the above sentence. What is the bridge?
> What is crossing it? Remember that I am not a native Englis
On 6/30/10, Kevin Bowling wrote:
>> GCC's mission is not to
>> support every system in a computer history museum. Older versions of
>> GCC created at the time of those systems still will work on those
>> systems.
>>
>
>
> This is an unfortunate attitude many people have in free software
> these d
On Tue, 29 Jun 2010 09:39:11 -0700
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> I am doing what I can. However, looking at other projects doesn't help
> very much because most other projects simply don't worry about these
> issues. That is, for example, why the Linux kernel was vulnerable to
> the SCO lawsuit
I
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 7:09 AM, David Edelsohn wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 1:53 AM, Kevin Bowling
> wrote:
>> In the GCC 4.5 announcement:
>>
>> "Support for the classic POWER architecture implemented in the
>> original RIOS and RIOS2 processors of the old IBM RS/6000 product line
>> has b
Quoting Basile Starynkevitch :
On Tue, 2010-06-29 at 12:50 -0400, Diego Novillo wrote:
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 12:35, Basile Starynkevitch
wrote:
> I agree, but a plugin could also do likewise, e.g. write memory contents
> in some kind of persistent storage.
Why don't we cross that bridge wh
Hey guys
I am reposting this link to GCC-help and GCC to get more feedback on
some front-end documentation I added a lot more texinfo mark-up, not
quite sure if i can generate a pdf and the .info is quite big to send
around. so the link to look at would be:
http://code.redbrain.co.uk/cgit.cgi/gcc
> "Brett" == Brett Neumeier writes:
Brett> What is still not clear is: what version of the ecj CVS project
Brett> corresponds to "ecj 4.5"? It doesn't look like there are branches or
Brett> tags in the CVS repository.
Yeah, oops. We've been remiss in doing that.
I believe 4.5 was made from
On Tue, 2010-06-29 at 12:50 -0400, Diego Novillo wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 12:35, Basile Starynkevitch
> wrote:
>
> > I agree, but a plugin could also do likewise, e.g. write memory contents
> > in some kind of persistent storage.
>
> Why don't we cross that bridge when we get to it?
[I
> "Brett" == Brett Neumeier writes:
Brett> Are there any plans to publish the source code along with the binary
Brett> jar file? In the meantime, where can I find the source code for the
Brett> current ecj, as needed by gcc? Is there a source repository I can get
Brett> to?
Yes, check out th
On Tue, 2010-06-29 at 11:40 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 06/29/2010 04:16 AM, Tom Tromey wrote:
> > Ian> In Tom's interesting idea, we would write the mark function by hand
> > for
> > Ian> each C++ type that we use GTY with.
> >
> > I think we should be clear that the need to write a mark f
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 12:35, Basile Starynkevitch
wrote:
> I agree, but a plugin could also do likewise, e.g. write memory contents
> in some kind of persistent storage.
Why don't we cross that bridge when we get to it? It seems odd to me
that a plugin would want to wind itself very tightly a
On Jun 29, 2010, at 9:35 AM, Basile Starynkevitch > wrote:
On Tue, 2010-06-29 at 07:02 -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
Basile Starynkevitch writes:
I think it would be fairly difficult to construct a case where a
plugin
cared about the exact compiler, rather than the exact version and
con
NightStrike writes:
> Maybe there's a way to look at how other projects handle the same
> issue, and find a different solution that's more workable for more
> people. I don't know what event you are specifically referring to in
> the GCC history that created this situation, but I don't think it'
On Tue, 2010-06-29 at 07:02 -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Basile Starynkevitch writes:
> I think it would be fairly difficult to construct a case where a plugin
> cared about the exact compiler, rather than the exact version and
> configuration. The only reason that the PCH support cares about
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 10:30 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> NightStrike writes:
>
>> It's not just present on "social community" sites. Look at the
>> entirety of sourceforge. That's quite a large respository of free
>> software, and yet it consists 100% of fake-named people (and please
>> unde
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 9:19 AM, Brett Neumeier wrote:
> That site holds the binaries of both ecj-4.3 and ecj-4.5. It has the
> source code only for ecj-4.3. What I am interested in is the *source
> code* for ecj-4.5.
OK, I found the source repositories by looking at the ecj-4.3 source.
ecj is i
NightStrike writes:
> I presented what I would need - access to the current code, as well as
> the database.
So as I understand it, you can access the code, right? There is of
course nothing confidential in the bugs database. I have put a copy
created by mysqldump at
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc
NightStrike writes:
> It's not just present on "social community" sites. Look at the
> entirety of sourceforge. That's quite a large respository of free
> software, and yet it consists 100% of fake-named people (and please
> understand what I mean by that.) It's even a place where projects get
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 5:37 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
> sourceware.org:/pub/java holds both ecj-4.3 and ecj-4.5
That site holds the binaries of both ecj-4.3 and ecj-4.5. It has the
source code only for ecj-4.3. What I am interested in is the *source
code* for ecj-4.5.
--
Brett Neumeier (bneum
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 1:53 AM, Kevin Bowling wrote:
> In the GCC 4.5 announcement:
>
> "Support for the classic POWER architecture implemented in the
> original RIOS and RIOS2 processors of the old IBM RS/6000 product line
> has been obsoleted in the rs6000 port. This does not affect the new
> g
Basile Starynkevitch writes:
> Do we have a programmatical way to access configuration information from
> inside plugins? (and not only version information)
The configuration arguments, and the version number, are passed to the
plugin in struct plugin_gcc_version.
> The scenario I am considerin
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 7:49 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez
wrote:
> On 29 June 2010 13:23, NightStrike wrote:
>>
>>> This whole issue has focussed in a little problem about the final step
>>> (installing bugzilla in sourceware.org), whereas there is so much work
>>> to do before reaching that step, tha
On 29 June 2010 13:23, NightStrike wrote:
>
>> This whole issue has focussed in a little problem about the final step
>> (installing bugzilla in sourceware.org), whereas there is so much work
>> to do before reaching that step, that probably the person that starts
>> this work won't be the same th
On 06/28/10 21:16, Tom Tromey wrote:
[snip]
>
> I think we should be clear that the need to write a mark function for a
> new type is a drawback of this approach. Perhaps gengtype could still
> write the functions for ordinary types in GCC, just not (templatized)
> containers.
[snip]
An alternat
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 4:34 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 29 June 2010 05:40, NightStrike wrote:
>>
>> Then you should consider using legitimate account creation policies.
>> If I just put "John Smith" in the sign up form, I would have gotten an
>> account.
>
> Not necessarily, there are mainta
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 7:24 AM, Richard Kenner
wrote:
>> The free software community works on a web of trust and personal
>> relationships. If you prefer to remain pseudonymous, then you must
>> accept that you will not be at the center of that web.
>
> I agree. Openness is an important part of
> The free software community works on a web of trust and personal
> relationships. If you prefer to remain pseudonymous, then you must
> accept that you will not be at the center of that web.
I agree. Openness is an important part of the free software community
and I don't believe that applies
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 6:14 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez
wrote:
> Still, I don't understand why a shell account is required to start
> working on this. From what I understand, the scripts that need
> conversion are not secret, so anyone can work on them. The bugzilla
> customizations can be accessed w
On 29 June 2010 01:39, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
> Manu, I have no problem supporting you in implementing a Bugzilla
> upgrade if you are still interested.
I won't have time before September for sure, most probably early October.
Still, I don't understand why a shell account is required to start
On 06/29/2010 04:16 AM, Tom Tromey wrote:
Ian> In Tom's interesting idea, we would write the mark function by hand for
Ian> each C++ type that we use GTY with.
I think we should be clear that the need to write a mark function for a
new type is a drawback of this approach. Perhaps gengtype cou
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 4:16 AM, Tom Tromey wrote:
> Ian> In Tom's interesting idea, we would write the mark function by hand for
> Ian> each C++ type that we use GTY with.
>
> I think we should be clear that the need to write a mark function for a
> new type is a drawback of this approach. Perha
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 1:42 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 29 June 2010 00:19, Basile Starynkevitch wrote:
>> On Mon, 2010-06-28 at 16:08 -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>>> Basile Starynkevitch writes:
>>>
>>> > * I don't know exactly what should be wished with respect to templates.
>>> > Tom T
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 1:55 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Artem Shinkarov writes:
>
>> I'm trying to implement a support for vector shuffling. For this
>> purpose I would like to introduce a built-in function and lower it
>> down in the veclower pass. However the problem is, that I don't want
>>
On 29 June 2010 05:40, NightStrike wrote:
>
> Then you should consider using legitimate account creation policies.
> If I just put "John Smith" in the sign up form, I would have gotten an
> account.
Not necessarily, there are maintainers with approval rights who
haven't got shell access, it's very
On Mon, 28 Jun 2010, Jack Howarth wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 02:59:39PM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> >
> > The trunk is frozen for all changes starting this Wednesday, 20:00 UTC
> > in preparation for merging the mem-ref2 branch. The freeze is expected
> > to last until early Friday mo
On Tue, 2010-06-29 at 10:22 +0200, David Brown wrote:
>
> Are you thinking of something like ccache functionality being
> implemented as a gcc plugin rather than an external program? You could
> do many nice things with that that are (I think) impossible with
> external ccache, such as caching
On 29/06/2010 07:36, Basile Starynkevitch wrote:
On Mon, 2010-06-28 at 16:58 -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
Basile Starynkevitch writes:
What is the role of executable_checksum from c-common.h& generated by
genchecksum.
It is used for precompiled headers. It verifies that the precompiled
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 12:45 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 06/29/2010 06:53 AM, Kevin Bowling wrote:
>> In the GCC 4.5 announcement:
>>
>> "Support for the classic POWER architecture implemented in the
>> original RIOS and RIOS2 processors of the old IBM RS/6000 product line
>> has been obsoleted
On 06/29/2010 06:53 AM, Kevin Bowling wrote:
> In the GCC 4.5 announcement:
>
> "Support for the classic POWER architecture implemented in the
> original RIOS and RIOS2 processors of the old IBM RS/6000 product line
> has been obsoleted in the rs6000 port. This does not affect the new
> generation
On Mon, 2010-06-28 at 23:30 -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Basile Starynkevitch writes:
>
> > However, I see a slightly more general use of executable_checksum (or
> > something similar) in plugins. Imagine a plugin that store some
> > information somewhere (e.g. in a database) and which might
47 matches
Mail list logo
