On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 04:04:16PM -0800, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 2:37 PM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
This is ok for 4.6 if it has been sufficiently tested.
Okay! Is there any testing you'd like to see beyond the
aforementioned success with arm and
Anyone?
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 1:10 PM, Brendan Conoboy bcono...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 08:24:41 +0800, Doug Kwan wrote:
Sorry about my oversight. I am on vacation now until Dec 19. I don't
have good internet access now and I will backport this to upstream 4.6
after I come
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 02:35:29PM -0800, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
Anyone?
This is ok for 4.6 if it has been sufficiently tested.
Jakub
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 2:37 PM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
This is ok for 4.6 if it has been sufficiently tested.
Okay! Is there any testing you'd like to see beyond the
aforementioned success with arm and x86_64 linux?
-Brendan
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 04:04:16PM -0800, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 2:37 PM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
This is ok for 4.6 if it has been sufficiently tested.
Okay! Is there any testing you'd like to see beyond the
aforementioned success with arm and x86_64
On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 08:24:41 +0800, Doug Kwan wrote:
Sorry about my oversight. I am on vacation now until Dec 19. I don't
have good internet access now and I will backport this to upstream 4.6
after I come back if the 4.6 maintainers agree to take this.
There isn't really anything to backport
Sorry about my oversight. I am on vacation now until Dec 19. I don't
have good internet access now and I will backport this to upstream 4.6
after I come back if the 4.6 maintainers agree to take this.
-Doug
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 9:02 PM, Richard Guenther
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On
On Dec 7, 2011, at 5:32 AM, Richard Earnshaw rearn...@arm.com wrote:
So this, to some extent seems to conflict with your rules for only fixing
regressions. This code has always been broken in one way or another,
so technically this doesn't qualify for the 4.6 branch.
My take, does this fix
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 05:59:53PM -0800, Doug Kwan wrote:
This is a backport for two upstream patches into our 4.6 branch.
I submitted the first patch by Julian a while ago for backport but
Richard Earnshaw pointed out a problem with the first patch. The second
patch from Joey fixes that
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 1:34 PM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 05:59:53PM -0800, Doug Kwan wrote:
This is a backport for two upstream patches into our 4.6 branch.
I submitted the first patch by Julian a while ago for backport but
Richard Earnshaw pointed out
On 07/12/11 13:02, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 1:34 PM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 05:59:53PM -0800, Doug Kwan wrote:
This is a backport for two upstream patches into our 4.6 branch.
I submitted the first patch by Julian a while ago for
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 2:32 PM, Richard Earnshaw rearn...@arm.com wrote:
On 07/12/11 13:02, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 1:34 PM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 05:59:53PM -0800, Doug Kwan wrote:
This is a backport for two upstream patches
On Wed, 7 Dec 2011, Richard Guenther wrote:
code - well, that's ok. Pointing people to the latest official
release series (in this case 4.6.x) is also ok, we're keeping too
many branches active IMNSHO.
As I recall we agreed in London that both 4.3 and 4.4 should be closed
(after a final
On Wed, Dec 07, 2011 at 04:16:25PM +, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Wed, 7 Dec 2011, Richard Guenther wrote:
code - well, that's ok. Pointing people to the latest official
release series (in this case 4.6.x) is also ok, we're keeping too
many branches active IMNSHO.
As I recall we
On 11/29/11 20:59, Doug Kwan wrote:
Hi Diego,
This is a backport for two upstream patches into our 4.6 branch.
I submitted the first patch by Julian a while ago for backport but
Richard Earnshaw pointed out a problem with the first patch. The second
patch from Joey fixes that problem.
Hi Diego,
This is a backport for two upstream patches into our 4.6 branch.
I submitted the first patch by Julian a while ago for backport but
Richard Earnshaw pointed out a problem with the first patch. The second
patch from Joey fixes that problem. This was tested on x86 and ARM.
-Doug
16 matches
Mail list logo
