On Sun, 4 Apr 2021, 00:46 Ian Lance Taylor via Gcc, wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 3, 2021 at 10:31 AM Giacomo Tesio wrote:
> >
> > But apparently you cannot decide which US-corporation should be thrown.
> > (indeed US-corporations hold the vast majoirity of SC heads, right now).
>
As it clearly says on
On 03/04/2021 22:12, Richard Copley wrote:
On Windows, linking two C++ translation units that both #include
results in errors about multiple definition of the weak
function __dummy_resume_destroy. This can be avoided by cherry-picking
commit 94fd05f1f76faca9dc9033b55d44c960155d38e9 [PR 95917].
Ian,
with all respect with your personal history, your contributions and
choices, I think you are still missing the point.
On April 3, 2021 11:45:23 PM UTC, Ian Lance Taylor
wrote:
> But you have singled out removing RMS (who as David noted was never
> really a member of the committee anyhow)
> I'm scared by the dangerous influence that dangeours US corporations
> and a dangerous military nation with a long history of human rights
> violations (see Snowden's and Assange's revelations and the ongoing
> Assange's trial) HAVE over the GCC development.
I agree that that's a concern, but th
Thanks Kenner...
On April 4, 2021 1:49:57 PM UTC, ken...@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu wrote:
> > I'm scared by the dangerous influence that dangeours US corporations
> > and a dangerous military nation with a long history of human rights
> > violations (see Snowden's and Assange's revelations and the ongoi
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2021 at 1:10 AM
> From: "Giacomo Tesio"
> To: "Ian Lance Taylor"
> Cc: "GCC Development" , "Nathan Sidwell"
> Subject: Re: RMS removed from the GCC Steering Committee
>
> Ian,
>
> with all respect with your personal history, your contributions and
> choices, I think y
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2021 at 1:10 AM
> From: "Giacomo Tesio"
> To: "Ian Lance Taylor"
> Cc: "GCC Development" , "Nathan Sidwell"
> Subject: Re: RMS removed from the GCC Steering Committee
>
> Ian,
>
> with all respect with your personal history, your contributions and
> choices, I think y
> Yet enough to slow down certain developments such as Nathan's libcody
> or the plugin framework.
The SC had no role in that, as was discussed here.
> You can also put trustworthy and credible observers to protect the
> interests of the global Free Software movement.
How is an "observer" going
On Sun, 4 Apr 2021, 12:40 Richard Copley, wrote:
> On 03/04/2021 22:12, Richard Copley wrote:
> On Windows, linking two C++ translation units that both #include
> results in errors about multiple definition of the weak
> function __dummy_resume_destroy. This can be avoided by cher
On Thu, 1 Apr 2021 at 14:35, Richard Biener wrote:
>
>
> The first release candidate for GCC 10.3 is available from
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/10.3.0-RC-20210401/
> ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/10.3.0-RC-20210401/
>
> and shortly its mirrors. It has been generated from git
Snapshot gcc-11-20210404 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/11-20210404/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 11 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
On Sun, Apr 4, 2021 at 6:11 AM Giacomo Tesio wrote:
>
> with all respect with your personal history, your contributions and
> choices, I think you are still missing the point.
This conversation is going on circles. You do not seem to hear what I
am saying, and you are telling me that I am not he
On April 4, 2021 10:26:37 PM GMT+02:00, Christophe Lyon
wrote:
>On Thu, 1 Apr 2021 at 14:35, Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>>
>> The first release candidate for GCC 10.3 is available from
>>
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/10.3.0-RC-20210401/
>> ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/10.3.0-R
13 matches
Mail list logo
