This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Defining a common plugin machinery
- From: Joe Buck <Joe dot Buck at synopsys dot COM>
- To: Basile STARYNKEVITCH <basile at starynkevitch dot net>
- Cc: Hugh Leather <hughleat at hotmail dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, "'Sean Callanan'" <spyffe at cs dot sunysb dot edu>, Cupertino Miranda <cupertino dot miranda at inria dot fr>, clattner at apple dot com, iant at google dot com, "'Taras Glek'" <taras dot judge at shaw dot ca>, "'Diego Novillo'" <dnovillo at google dot com>, "Mike O'Boyle" <mob at inf dot ed dot ac dot uk>, Grigori Fursin <grigori dot fursin at inria dot fr>
- Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2008 11:01:04 -0700
- Subject: Re: Defining a common plugin machinery
- References: <48CF93F7.8010901@google.com> <48CF9C94.9010809@starynkevitch.net> <48D0286D.8020302@mozilla.com> <48e33659.0c58560a.6454.7b17@mx.google.com> <48E37481.7040803@hotmail.com> <BLU142-DAV64A066DB0D1D85765DD4BC1420@phx.gbl> <BLU142-DAV87E6265C2FA71995506F8C1420@phx.gbl> <48E39F49.7000109@starynkevitch.net>
On Wed, Oct 01, 2008 at 06:03:21PM +0200, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
> So we now have many plugin proposals & experiments. However, we do know
> that there are some legal/political/license issues on these points (with
> the GCC community rightly wanting as hard as possible to avoid
> proprietary plugins), that some interaction seems to happen (notably
> between Steering Committee & FSF), that the work is going slowly
> (because of lack of resource & labor & funding? at FSF).
That impression isn't really right; we're getting close now to a resolution.
There should be some news soon.