Including GMP as an upstream package (was problems building fortran)
Kaveh R. Ghazi
ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu
Sat Feb 14 17:33:00 GMT 2004
> From: Roger Sayle <roger@eyesopen.com>
>
> In addition to you, me and Kaveh, I believe Richard Henderson and
> Joseph Myers are also in favour of at least investigating gmp's mpfr
> as a replacement or subroutine library providing functionality for
> real.c/real.h. Presumably Paul Brook and Toon would also favour
> including gmp with GCC to simplify gfortan issues. Though hopefully
> these and others can publically lend support to such a proposal in
> this thread (or correct any misunderstaing/misrepresentation of mine).
>
> Presumably Torbjorn must first give his permission, and then the SC or
> perhaps just a single global-write priviledge maintainer must
> (pre)approve a patch to place it in CVS in gcc and src. Finally, the
> "configury" folks will need to wire it up appropriately to the build
> process, and the usual portability testing as GMP then gets compiled
> using the host compiler on GCC's numerous supported platforms.
>
> Alas there is little I can contribute, except force of will:
> Please? Pretty please?
> Roger
A couple of thoughts:
To clarify, I don't know that we need "permission" to include GMP in
so much as it is free software. However I wouldn't want to proceed
without buy-in and advice (and perhaps volunteered labor) from GMP's
maintainer.
In an ideal world, it would also be good to have a GMP expert act as
local maintainer keeping things in-sync. I don't know if Tege is
willing to assume any additional GCC responsibilities at this time.
However we could get started by just having a volunteer to perform the
first import and get it working initially.
Do we have any such volunteer(s) ?
--
Kaveh R. Ghazi ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu
More information about the Gcc
mailing list