Re: Another paralell make patch for libf2c

[Jeffrey A Law <law at cygnus dot com>]

  In message <m0zQFsc-000395C@ocean.lucon.org>you write:
  > > ps.  I agree totally with your other comments.  Far better for HJ to
  > > explain the patch when he submits it instead of making us guess.
  > > 
  > 
  > I have to ask who reviewed/approved those bogus changes to g77
  > makefiles? It is not the first time it broke the parallel
  > build. Why not let someone who at least knows something about
  > the GNU make review the makefile changes first?
Please do not change the subject.  That is a totally different issue.

The question at hand is why do we always have to ask you to explain your
patches?  Why can't you explain them like everyone else manages to do?  I've
been asking you to do this for over a year now.

It is not fair to the people reviewing your patches, nor is it fair to the
other developers for us to continue to give you special treatment in this
regard.


--

As to the bogus libf2c changes -- most of us do not use parallel make and are
not intimately aware of the issues.  Furthermore, the libf2c makefiles have
been undergoing rather serious changes recently.  It is normal for bugs to
appear as part of the development process.

Jeff