This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: A new parallel buld patch
In article <20000518085958.A24515@lucon.org> you write:
>On Thu, May 18, 2000 at 09:19:27AM -0600, Jeffrey A Law wrote:
>> In message <200005180437.AAA27608@mal-ach.watson.ibm.com>you write:
>> > Below is the patch from HJ's URL for which HJ seems incapable of
>> > emailing directly, documenting, explaining, providing a ChangeLog
>> > description, or sending to the proper mailinglist. Sigh.
>> Typical HJ. I'm not going to try and decipher what the patch does. I
>> know Zack tried and indicated the patch had a number of problems.
>>
>> I do not recommend installing it.
>
>I had enough. Alexandre, I want to withdraw my patch. Please don't
>install it.
>
>For those who are interested in my patches for gcc 3.0, they will
>be at
>
>http://www.lucon.org/gcc/3.0/
>
>I will keep updating my patches and any suggestions are more than
>welcome via private emails. There will be no further emails to
>the gcc mailing lists from me on gcc 3.0.
Don't.
I'm already fed up enough of the current situation with respect to NO
binutils release in a long while, that I can do without the *main*
linux-toolchains developper jumping off and splintering his own group.
Working with gcc on not too well supported platforms is hard enough
already without your playing the Diva and always trying to pull
Linux development up-and-foremost to the center piece.
Trying to take the gcc development effort `hostage' like you're doing
is definitely not a good thing.
>Jeff, you know you installed an incomplete C++ thunks patch from
>Martin to the gcc 2.95 branch on April 12 and as the result,
>Linux/glibc/ia32 is broken. Why did you do it to Linux? People
>have been telling you about it. Why haven't you done anything
>about it? Don't tell me you don't know what to do.
It might just be that Jeff is chronically overworked. I don't know how
many emails he receives a day, which private life he has...
but I am reasonably certain he is sensible, and I definitely trust him.
You want your patches in ? Fine. Then respect the common development
model, don't go into a dark corner and write `linux-gcc' into another
private project.
And write Changelog entries to your patches. Give explanations about what
you are doing. Other developpers are working that way. I don't see any
reason for which you should have a special exemption.