This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] libjava/classpath/native/jni/java-lang/java_lang_VMProcess.c: Be sure 'errbuf' always be zero terminated.
- From: Chen Gang <gang dot chen dot 5i5j at gmail dot com>
- To: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>, tromey at redhat dot com, aph at redhat dot com, per at bothner dot com
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2014 13:19:07 +0800
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] libjava/classpath/native/jni/java-lang/java_lang_VMProcess.c: Be sure 'errbuf' always be zero terminated.
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <53D63F19 dot 4050405 at gmail dot com> <53D7313C dot 8080203 at gmail dot com> <53D908CA dot 3060405 at gmail dot com> <53D9C19D dot 7040704 at redhat dot com> <53D9CD3B dot 2040803 at gmail dot com>
Sorry for no testsuite, I shall send patch v2 for it after finish
related testsuite within this week end (2014-08-03).
And the patch v2 also need cc to firstname.lastname@example.org
On 07/31/2014 12:59 PM, Chen Gang wrote:
> On 07/31/2014 12:10 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>> On 07/30/14 09:01, Chen Gang wrote:
>>> Hello All:
>>> I shall stop making this kind of patch, next. The reason is that I worry
>>> about what I have done have negative effect to others. And next, I shall
>>> try to send another kinds of patches for gcc when I have time.
>>> Many persons or companies use open source who never give thanks or
>>> contribution back to open source. But open source (especially,
>>> fundamental software) still provide common contributions to outside.
>>> What I have done is only for contribution back to open source, so I can
>>> understand none-reply from open source (at least, it is not the excuse
>>> to let myself stop). But what I worry about is whether bother others.
>> I don't think you've have any kind of negative impact. GCC developers
>> tend to be a bit more conservative and try not to change code just for
>> the sake of changing code. Thus we tend to want to have a clearer
>> understanding of why a particular change needs to be made.
>> It's also the case that we tend to look more closely at patches from
>> relatively new developers simply because we don't have a long history of
>> interactions that have built trust over time.
>> So, just to be clear, I don't think you're bothering anyone and I would
>> recommend you continue to analyze code and send patches.
> OK, thank you for your encouragement. And I shall continue to send this
> kind of patches.
>> And sorry for telling you everything goes to gcc-patches. I often
>> forget there's a separate java patch list -- and more generally for the
>> runtime libraries, we're often a downstream code consumer. Thus a
>> proposed change in some of the runtime libraries may need to be sent to
>> other projects (Classpath is a good example).
> OK, and I shall notice about it next time (send related patches to
> correct mailing list).
> For me, it will be good idea to have a related document for these
> mailing list intruduction (maybe it has, and I shall try to find it).
Open, share, and attitude like air, water, and life which God blessed