This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH build/doc] Replacing libiberty with gnulib
- From: Manuel López-Ibáñez <lopezibanez at gmail dot com>
- To: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: ayush goel <ayushgoel1610 at gmail dot com>, Gcc Patch List <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
- Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 00:38:41 +0100
- Subject: Re: [PATCH build/doc] Replacing libiberty with gnulib
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CAGp8FVWQA07SmwP8u1CByk2zQmWU4b9Ldgk9rnp=yv2Tf_bZ9w@mail.gmail.com> <CAESRpQBgROXjDG1QCZJj6nKXGNZ=z4cM=_nTvKDM6R-ruZh_EA@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1607291651000.29277@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <CAESRpQC5h_y0eHyqdc57iWBUMUpJSJPJqHU3ZYovUQ7R6w3S1Q@mail.gmail.com>
On 29 July 2016 at 17:55, Manuel López-Ibáñez <lopezibanez@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 29 July 2016 at 17:51, Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 20 Jul 2016, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
>>
>>> On 20 July 2016 at 19:21, ayush goel <ayushgoel1610@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > Hey,
>>> > As a first step of my GSOC project
>>> > (https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/replacelibibertywithgnulib) I have imported
>>> > the gnulib library inside the gcc tree. I have created gnulib as a top
>>> > level directory which contains the necessary scripts to import the
>>> > modules. It also contains the necessary Makefile.in and configure.ac
>>> > files.
>>>
>>> Looks good to me, but I cannot approve it. Joseph, what do you think?
>>
>> That this would best be reviewed by a build-system maintainer.
>
> Sure, who could that be?
Jeff, as a global reviewer, how can we move this forward? You have
said in the past: "I suspect we'll probably want to go with direct use
of gnulib obstack at some point." Well, here it is.
If there is something wrong or missing, ideally we would like to know
so that Ayush can work on fixing it before the Summer of Code is over
in less than two weeks.
Cheers,
Manuel.