This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: PATCH: Fix libffi for ia64
- From: Jim Wilson <wilson at specifixinc dot com>
- To: Anthony Green <green at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Andreas Schwab <schwab at suse dot de>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org,hjl at lucon dot org
- Date: 05 May 2004 15:52:36 -0700
- Subject: Re: PATCH: Fix libffi for ia64
- References: <20040420202718.GA30057@lucon.org><jepta2l0x5.fsf@sykes.suse.de> <20040420232244.GA657@lucon.org><1082744479.3638.17.camel@escape> <408DE4E7.5050604@specifixinc.com> <1083767319.3575.32.camel@escape>
On Wed, 2004-05-05 at 07:28, Anthony Green wrote:
> I hit a snag with one of the contributors who rejected the idea of doing
> any new paperwork, although they were already a significant GCC
> contributor.
Thanks for the update. If there is just one contributor that is holding
us up, we should consider reverting patches from that person and then
later reimplementing what was taken out. I'd rather have a less
functional libffi with FSF copyrights than a fully functional one that
continues to violate FSF copyright policy.
Meanwhile, we can wait a bit to see if Mark Wielaard can resolve the
situation.
It might also be helpful to put a freeze of some sort on libffi. We
really shouldn't be accepting any libffi patches unless the contributor
already has libffi paperwork in order. The current policy of accepting
patches from any gcc contributor, even if they don't have libffi papers,
means that we are just creating additional obstacles to the FSF
transfer.
--
Jim Wilson, GNU Tools Support, http://www.SpecifixInc.com