Re: [PATCH] RHEL: Look in more places to find g++ headers and runtime

2016-05-09 Thread Rafael Espíndola via cfe-commits
r268912. Thanks, Rafael On 6 May 2016 at 17:06, Michael Lampe wrote: > No, I'm hoping on someone else to commit this. (You?) > > Same with this one: > > https://www.mail-archive.com/cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org/msg18696.html > > -Michael > > > Rafael Espíndola wrote: >> >> LGTM. Do you have commi

Re: [PATCH] RHEL: Look in more places to find g++ headers and runtime

2016-05-07 Thread Michael Lampe via cfe-commits
No, I'm hoping on someone else to commit this. (You?) Same with this one: https://www.mail-archive.com/cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org/msg18696.html -Michael Rafael Espíndola wrote: LGTM. Do you have commit access? Cheers, Rafael On 11 April 2016 at 14:49, Michael Lampe wrote: New patch attac

Re: [PATCH] RHEL: Look in more places to find g++ headers and runtime

2016-04-30 Thread Rafael Espíndola via cfe-commits
LGTM. Do you have commit access? Cheers, Rafael On 11 April 2016 at 14:49, Michael Lampe wrote: > New patch attached. > > -Michael > > > Rafael Espíndola wrote: >> >> LGTM with a comment saying why it is needed. >> >> Cheers, >> Rafael >> >> >> On 22 March 2016 at 23:02, Michael Lampe via cfe-c

Re: [PATCH] RHEL: Look in more places to find g++ headers and runtime

2016-04-11 Thread Michael Lampe via cfe-commits
New patch attached. -Michael Rafael Espíndola wrote: LGTM with a comment saying why it is needed. Cheers, Rafael On 22 March 2016 at 23:02, Michael Lampe via cfe-commits wrote: Some distros with ten years of support ship an old gcc but later offer more recent versions for installation in p

Re: [PATCH] RHEL: Look in more places to find g++ headers and runtime

2016-04-10 Thread Rafael Espíndola via cfe-commits
LGTM with a comment saying why it is needed. Cheers, Rafael On 22 March 2016 at 23:02, Michael Lampe via cfe-commits wrote: > Some distros with ten years of support ship an old gcc but later offer more > recent versions for installation in parallel. These versions are typically > not only neede