x86-64 maintainer + libstdc++ fix [was Re: Libstdc++ x86-64 fix]
Andreas Jaeger
aj@suse.de
Tue Jan 8 21:42:00 GMT 2002
Phil Edwards <pedwards@disaster.jaj.com> writes:
> On Tue, Jan 08, 2002 at 04:33:32PM +0100, Bo Thorsen wrote:
>> x86-64 gcc was built succesfully with this small fix installed:
>
> As described on http://gcc.gnu.org/lists.html this patch should also be sent
> to the libstdc++ list. I don't know who needs to approve x86-64 changes.
> From a libstdc++ viewpoint this is fine, but it's a port maintainer's call.
Jan Hubicka, Bo and myself work on the x86-64 port. Since x86-64 is
in the backend an extension of i386, I fear you cannot really separate
x86-64 and i386 maintainership and therefore we didn't appoint a
separate x86-64 maintainer. A x86-64 maintainer does make sense for
e.g. libstdc++ and configure stuff but that's only a tiny part. Stan
Cox is listed as x86 maintainer but I don't think he should be also
x86-64 maintainer. I wouldn't mind seeing Jan Hubicka added as x86-64
maintainer and as x86 co-maintainer, he did most of the recent work on
both anyway. But who has to decide this?
So, since libstdc++ has no problems with this and we have defacto no
maintainer, is it ok to commit Bo's patch?
>> 2001-12-08 Bo Thorsen <boOsuse.co.uk>
> [...]
>> Hifndef _GLIBCPP_CPU_LIMITS
>> Hdefine _GLIBCPP_CPU_LIMITS 1
>>
>> +Hdefine __glibcpp_long_bits 64
>> +
>> Hdefine __glibcpp_long_double_bits 80
>>
>> Hendif
>
> Something is changing characters, @->O, #->H, in your emailer.
Strange, it showed up correctly in my mailer.
Andreas
--
Andreas Jaeger
SuSE Labs aj@suse.de
private aj@arthur.inka.de
http://www.suse.de/~aj
More information about the Libstdc++
mailing list