This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [patch]: Sandro's GCJ on Darwin/i386 patches pt.4

From: Geoffrey Keating <geoffk at apple dot com>
To: howarth at bromo dot msbb dot uc dot edu (Jack Howarth)
Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 13:47:35 -0700
Subject: Re: [patch]: Sandro's GCJ on Darwin/i386 patches pt.4
References: <20060917200204.BDD32110010@bromo.msbb.uc.edu>

On 17/09/2006, at 1:02 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:

Geoff, Define 'break'. If Eric can bootstrap the patches on his machine for a Darwin-i386 build and it passes all of the make check without regression, I don't understand what possible 'breakage' there could be?

First of all, there are lots of possible ways that might be insufficient. I can think of three things immediately; I would like you to also think about it, since some of them ought to be obvious to you.

Secondly the tree is currently in regression-only mode. Do you really think this is a regression fix? Does it have some great benefit that you can't get with --enable-languages=java?

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

References:
- Re: [patch]: Sandro's GCJ on Darwin/i386 patches pt.4
  - From: Jack Howarth

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]