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