On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 11:37 PM, David Miller <da...@davemloft.net> wrote: > From: Konstantin Serebryany <konstantin.s.serebry...@gmail.com> > Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 23:19:51 +0400 > >> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 11:09 PM, David Miller <da...@davemloft.net> wrote: >>> From: Konstantin Serebryany <konstantin.s.serebry...@gmail.com> >>> Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 23:02:36 +0400 >>> >>>> I really need your help to resolve this mess. >>> >>> I thought it was abundantly clear that the burdon falls upon the ASAN >>> folks, since they are the ones who care about the external dependency. >>> >>> Nobody else inside of the GCC community cares about that. >> >> If nobody else in the GCC community cares about ASAN, we should >> disable the SPARC build and >> let us handle the issue without rush. >> We are interested in SPARC, but much less than in our own sanity. > > I am saying that nobody has a direct interest in the LLVM > dependencies,
We do. As long as we maintain libasan in GCC, so do you (by transitive relation). Let's stop this. Please apply whatever minimal patch required to unbreak the SPARC build. We will not be accepting any non-trivial patches until we set up semi-automated way to pull the upstream sources. --kcc > therefore they are entirely your responsibility. Please > don't twist my words. > > Everyone in the GCC community cares that core features are supported > on as many targets as possible.
