This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Exhaustive Instructions for Toolchain Generation
- From: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com>
- To: Jeffrey Walton <noloader at gmail dot com>
- Cc: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, GCC Development <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2017 17:27:47 +0100
- Subject: Re: Exhaustive Instructions for Toolchain Generation
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CAAD4mYhF0JAkvLcBzHCocB9L5iTd5XU9K33WHeDsJo=_GxqfLg@mail.gmail.com> <CAH6eHdSLuB=uZ4Hseb-CQeT9=E8JTb8=J3yHxBu2DLm7kq=2DA@mail.gmail.com> <CAAD4mYinDcV_Avb9_KwLEmofAiSri_2kHiQrfdu1=LZL0+L3YA@mail.gmail.com> <CAH6eHdTC3yKYy56fZPS4BdCS4y3V2FFHJqhWmgu5VJzj9j-oAA@mail.gmail.com> <CAAD4mYjVnGZkCeezfLEos4QRyYcHJTmgA-322aMRzKVzwFttJA@mail.gmail.com> <CAAD4mYhvgxpn8R=OXDqHY5bLV18--sjA315qky9qLPicM68KRA@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1710041517130.9643@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <CAH8yC8=bq0d3skKKSBiWc7AhSNtqVCzd8idq42RcWYqVFA6JGg@mail.gmail.com> <CAH6eHdQ07b+ERSy=-QOhWc3MNviPieQ4YfaXYD5idNVqAsKEpw@mail.gmail.com>
On 4 October 2017 at 17:25, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 4 October 2017 at 17:14, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
>> Maybe some of the first steps is to (1) recognize the information
>> management problem, and (2) provide information dissemination that's
>> {amicable|consistent|?} with what's occurring in 2017. I mean,
>
> What does that mean in concrete terms?
>
>> README's were fine in the 1980's but with the advent of the web, users
>> do different things nowadays.
>
> Which README are you criticising?
>
> Got any concrete suggestions we can act on, or just "make it betterer"?
>
>> For completeness, GCC has a wiki. But I still don't have an account to
>> make an occasional update; and I still don't know how to get an
>> account. I tried to get one in the past but the process was broken so
>> I gave up.
>
> 1) create an account
> 2) get your username added to the right page to grant editing privs
> (by someone who already has them)
>
> How is this broken?
And "I couldn't be bothered to update the wiki, but someone should" is
hardly a good start, is it?