This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [tree-ssa] Integrating g95
- From: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>
- To: Paul Brook <paul at nowt dot org>
- Cc: "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Toon Moene <toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl>
- Date: 31 May 2003 18:53:14 -0400
- Subject: Re: [tree-ssa] Integrating g95
- Organization: Red Hat Canada
- References: <200305312248.57683.paul@nowt.org>
On Sat, 2003-05-31 at 17:48, Paul Brook wrote:
> Technically speaking I don't think there are any problems. It's just a case
> of dropping into the source tree and a small patch to tell the build system
> about the target library.
>
Agreed. It will be good having g95 in GCC at last.
> Assuming ot objections are raised, where should I send the changes?
> Would you prefer a tarball and small patch, or just a huge patch?
>
The patch is probably going to be large for mail. A link to it should
be enough.
> The code comitted would be identical to that at
> http://gcc-g95.sourceforge.net
> In the short-medium term we would probably still maintain the seperate
> external source tree for our convenience, with frequent resyncs between the
> two.
>
Hmm, I'm not sure about this. If we are going to move it, I think it
might be best to make the switch at once. Why do you think it would be
more convenient to keep the two repositories?
Diego.