This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: PATCH Fix for issue 40411


Jeff Downs <heydowns@borg.com> writes:

> On Wed, 18 Nov 2009, Rainer Orth wrote:

>> * I'm pretty sure the patch is big enough to require a copyright
>>   assignement to integrate.  See
>>   http://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html#legal for details.
>
> Assigning is not a problem if necessary. The work is my own and I'm happy 
> to assign copyright. I notice on the page you link that placing the work 
> in the public domain is an option. I'm fine with that too. Whichever is 
> less red tape.

I've practically no experience in this respect so far, except from my
own copyright assignment years ago, so perhaps other maintainers can
chime in.

>> * The gcc.c change may require a matching change to the docs
>>   (gcc/doc/invoke.texi).
>
> I took a look at this doc and I think it probably is ok as-is since the 
> options are not added/changed in anyway; this just corrects the 
> implementation on Solaris.
> If maintainers want something added, we can work that though.

The fact that there is a quoting mechanism in specs should be stated in
the docs, not left for others that need it to discover from the source.

>> * I'll review the Solaris specific parts, assuring that they work on all
>>   supported releases.
>
> Sounds good. I only currently have access to Sparc-based Solaris 10.

No problem: while I've only got Solaris 9/10/11 running at the moment
both on SPARC and x86 (except Solaris 9/x86), I have all the media back
to Solaris 2.0, so I can check what was delivered there.  But anything
before Solaris 7 is irrelevant to GCC right now.

>> * Some comments on the ChangeLog entries: the PR is target/40411, not
>>   gcc/40411.  Please check either the GNU Coding Standards or existing
>>   ChangeLog entries for the proper form: they describe what changed, not
>>   why.  The why may belong into comments in the source.
>
> Oops - sorry about the PR mixup.  I was looking for the component in the 
> PR and I looked at the wrong box (product).
> Regarding the content of the ChangeLog entries, I'll provide some new ones 
> as the review moves along that more closely fit what you are looking for.

No problem at all.

> Thanks for the input.

Thanks for your contribution.

       Rainer

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]