This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Bugzilla components for target libraries
- From: Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>
- To: Rainer Orth <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, Arnaud Charlet <charlet at adacore dot com>, Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
- Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 10:35:30 -0800
- Subject: Re: Bugzilla components for target libraries
- References: <yddwrb8qfhl.fsf@manam.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE>
Rainer Orth <ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE> writes:
> The entries in parens are only covered indirectly and may or may not
> warrant their own components. I'd argue that it would be helpful to
> have libada and libgo components of their own (while libcpp would
> probably be overkill), but of course that's ultimately up to the
> respective maintainers.
I see no advantage to a separate libgo component. Bug reports won't
know which component to use when filing a bug. The maintainers of the
go/libgo components would be the same.
> I'm undeciced what to do about libdecnumber (primarily/exclusively from
> upstream), libiberty (shared with src), and libssp (probably too
> small/too little activity to warrant its own component).
libiberty should just be other.
Ian