This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Success report on Linux/PPC, small Ada problem
- From: Laurent Guerby <guerby at acm dot org>
- To: Geert Bosch <bosch at gnat dot com>
- Cc: Robert Dewar <dewar at gnat dot com>, fw at deneb dot enyo dot de,mrs at windriver dot com, rth at redhat dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org,jsm28 at cam dot ac dot uk, minyard at acm dot org
- Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2002 09:02:52 +0100
- Subject: Re: Success report on Linux/PPC, small Ada problem
- References: <A4EF1345-1AAF-11D6-82C8-00039344BF4A@gnat.com>
Geert Bosch wrote:
> It is very easy to get up-to-date if we are allowed to put all out
> changes in as a big merge, and not broken up in individual small separately
> tested (in FSF GCC tree). Currently the process is very cumbersome and
> labour-intensive however, requiring lots of retesting of front-end patches
> which already have been tested extensively together and separately with
> the GCC 2.8.1 backend.
> Regularly doing resynchs directly using CVS would be much faster and
> make FSF/ACT trees practically identical.
Personally I'm in favour of a big one shot synch without much of ChangeLog
(limited to the Ada bits, common backend change must have proper
ChangeLog of course).
This would get the situation of GCC CVS vs ACT CVS back to reasonable
right now and will allow
effective volunteer work.
Laurent Guerby <firstname.lastname@example.org>