This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH 5/5] add libcc1


On 06/19/14 14:52, Tom Tromey wrote:
Tom> I've edited this one down by removing the auto-generated stuff , and
Tom> then compressed it.

Here's a new version of patch #5.
I've removed the generated code; let's see if it gets through without
compression.

I think this addresses all the reviews:

* It uses gcc-plugin.m4 to disable the plugin
* It does some configure checks for needed functionality, and disables
   the plugin if they are not found
* libcc1 and the plugin now do a protocol version handshake at
   startup
* The diagnostic overriding code is now in the plugin, not in gcc proper
* gdb now tells libcc1 about the target triplet, and libcc1 uses
   this to invoke the proper GCC.  This is done by (ewww) searching $PATH.

Tom

2014-06-19  Phil Muldoon  <pmuldoon@redhat.com>
	    Tom Tromey  <tromey@redhat.com>

	* Makefile.def: Add libcc1 to host_modules.
	* configure.ac (host_tools): Add libcc1.
	* Makefile.in, configure: Rebuild.

2014-06-19  Phil Muldoon  <pmuldoon@redhat.com>
	    Jan Kratochvil  <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
	    Tom Tromey  <tromey@redhat.com>

	* aclocal.m4: New file.
	* callbacks.cc: New file.
	* callbacks.hh: New file.
	* cc1plugin-config.h.in: New file.
	* configure: New file.
	* configure.ac: New file.
	* connection.cc: New file.
	* connection.hh: New file.
	* findcomp.cc: New file.
	* findcomp.hh: New file.
	* libcc1.cc: New file.
	* libcc1plugin.sym: New file.
	* libcc1.sym: New file.
	* Makefile.am: New file.
	* Makefile.in: New file.
	* marshall.cc: New file.
	* marshall.hh: New file.
	* names.cc: New file.
	* names.hh: New file.
	* plugin.cc: New file.
	* rpc.hh: New file.
	* status.hh: New file.
So my biggest concern here is long term maintenance -- who's going to own care and feeding of these bits over time.

My inclination is to go ahead and approve, but explicitly note that if the bits do start to rot that we'll be fairly aggressive at disabling/removing them.

Now that my position is out there for everyone to see, give the other maintainers a few days (say until Monday) to chime in with any objections.

Obviously if there are no objections and you check in the change, please be on the lookout for any fallout. I'm particularly concerned about AIX, Solaris and other non-linux platforms.

Does this deserve a mention in the news file?

Jeff


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]