This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Patch to sourcebuild.texi
On Mon, 5 Jul 2004, Phil Edwards wrote:
> Seeing how
>
> a) bootstraps are killed without it
> b) it merely reflects current reality (after the @comma patch)
> c) it's straightforward
>
> I'd say either check this in and let us get back to building, or revert
> the original change and let us get back to building.
Though I reverted the original patch pending a review of this one, I don't
think there's any general rule that you can first check in a patch you
have authority to check in, then check in one you don't have authority to
check in to fix breakage caused by the first patch. It would be a
remarkably convenient way of doing lots of changes without review - change
the parts of the compiler you maintain, and avoid the bother of objections
to the design of your changes to the rest of the compiler that go along
with them by noting they are needed to avoid breakage - if it were so :-).
It's actually the original change that might plausibly fit under the
"obvious rule" as a fix for the gccint onlinedocs generation breakage.
But gccadmin has only 2 subscribers, and manuals no longer getting
generated don't disappear from onlinedocs until the 15th of each month, so
the onlinedocs breakage may not have been immediately obvious.
--
Joseph S. Myers http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~jsm28/gcc/
jsm@polyomino.org.uk (personal mail)
jsm28@gcc.gnu.org (Bugzilla assignments and CCs)