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 ping (stage1-ish patches)

From: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
To: Rainer Orth <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE>, Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
Cc: Richard Biener <rguenther at suse dot de>, Dodji Seketeli <dseketel at redhat dot com>, Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 10:42:34 -0700
Subject: Re: Patch ping (stage1-ish patches)
Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
References: <20131121170912 dot GG3403 at virgil dot suse> <528F73E2 dot 9060805 at redhat dot com> <20131122151519 dot GD892 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <528F8802 dot 3050408 at redhat dot com> <20131127073647 dot GW892 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <ydd61re9iay dot fsf at lokon dot CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE>

On 11/27/13 04:48, Rainer Orth wrote:

Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> writes:

On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 09:36:18AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:

In fact, I would suggest that anyone with a pending patch from prior
to stage1 close that hasn't gotten feedback by midnight Tuesday ping
their patch.  I'd like to have a sense of everything that is
outstanding sooner rather than later and wrap up any loose ends as
quickly as possible.


On my side, there's

[c++, driver] Add -lrt on Solaris
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-05/msg01488.html

resubmitted as

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-06/msg00412.html

It's unclear if the more intrusive solution outlined in the second
message (introduce libstdc++.spec) were acceptable in stage3, and I'm
uncertain if I can get it ready in time.

Well, the short-term hack to g++spec.c along with the correspondingchange to sol2.h is, OK for the trunk.

As for the more invasive change, I'd let the C++ runtime guys decide ifits too invasive for stage3. If you go that route, worst case is it'sconsidered too invasive and it goes in during stage1 and you can removethe hack-ish solution from this patch.


jeff

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Patch ping (stage1-ish patches)
  - From: Rainer Orth

References:
- [PATCH] Make the IRA shrink-wrapping preparation also work on ppc64
  - From: Martin Jambor
- Re: [PATCH] Make the IRA shrink-wrapping preparation also work on ppc64
  - From: Vladimir Makarov
- Re: [PATCH] Make the IRA shrink-wrapping preparation also work on ppc64
  - From: Jakub Jelinek
- Re: [PATCH] Make the IRA shrink-wrapping preparation also work on ppc64
  - From: Jeff Law
- Patch ping (stage1-ish patches)
  - From: Jakub Jelinek
- Re: Patch ping (stage1-ish patches)
  - From: Rainer Orth

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