This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Unreviewed patch
- From: kaz Kojima <kkojima at rr dot iij4u dot or dot jp>
- To: tromey at redhat dot com
- Cc: green at redhat dot com, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, java at gcc dot gnu dot org, joern dot rennecke at superh dot com, aoliva at redhat dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 08:19:53 +0900
- Subject: Unreviewed patch
- References: <87u1av8jrb.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>
Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com> wrote:
> As you've discovered, libffi is a bit under maintained. I'm not
> really the person to do it -- I'd do little more than rubber stamp
> patches that come in. I'm happy to do that, though, in the absence of
> a better process. Hopefully some more qualified person out there will
> speak up (and we'll end up with a libffi entry in MAINTAINERS).
>
> I believe we've agreed in the past that port maintainers can make
> port-specific libffi changes. So I think you can check in your fix on
> that basis.
I'd like to check my patch in. Thanks.
I totally agree with your and Anthony's suggestion about the approvement
for libffi changes, though in this specific case I hesitate over because
sh64-linux is for the SHmedia processor with a new and very different ISA
from the other SH family and I'm rather new to SHmedia.
So I thought and still think that it would be nice if SHmedia experts see
my patch.
BTW, libjava works to some extent with the sjlj configuration using this
libffi port. I'll report it to the java list.
Regards,
kaz