[PATCH] Enable building of libsanitizer on sparc linux again.

[Konstantin Serebryany]

On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Diego Novillo <dnovillo@google.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 10:10 PM, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:
>> From: Konstantin Serebryany <konstantin.s.serebryany@gmail.com>
>> Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2012 19:01:56 -0800
>>
>>> I am open to suggestions on how to avoid forking the two versions.
>>> If we fork, the original asan team will not be able to cope with two
>>> repositories.
>>
>> The maintainer of the sanitizer's job is to do the merging and resolve
>> the conflicts between the two trees.  This is how every other similar
>> situation is handled.
>>
>> What's happening here, frankly, is garbage.
>
> Calm down, David.  I understand this is frustrating, but reacting in
> this manner is not helpful to anyone.  We have some new maintainers
> that are trying to understand how the system works.  Insulting and
> berating them will only encourage them to pack up and leave.
>
> There is no need to do any forking.
>
> Kostya, would it be acceptable if fixes that go in the gcc tree get
> then propagated to the LLVM tree?

It may be acceptable for trivial patches, but we still want to review them.
Once we review patch, it is easier for us to put it into LLVM first
and then to gcc.
Which reminds me, that libsanitizer/README.gcc is not helping in this
process yet...

>  The two trees don't need to be kept
> in sync at every commit.  Patches to the GCC tree will be in your
> inbox or submitted to gcc-patches.
>
>
> Diego.