"Frank Ch. Eigler" writes:
> That makes sense, but how many people are in cagney's shoes
I am one of those people - I have two email addresses listed in
MAINTAINERS, with two sets of copyright papers filed with the FSF (a
personal assignment and a work one). I use the appropriate email
address
> And in fact, you should be able to decide at *expand* time which
> of the two you need for the given set of operands.
I already check for multiple fars at expand, and force all but one of
them to registers. Somewhere before reload they get put back in.
>"rl78_virt_insns_ok () && rl78_far_
On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 01:39:42PM -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
> AIUI, we specifically need >= 1.5.3 (or a version with a backport) to
> get support for multiple load_lib paths mentioned by Bernhard, which is
> what motivated this thread (on gcc-patches, before it spread to the gcc
> list):
We als
Snapshot gcc-4.9-20150916 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.9-20150916/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.9 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On behalf of the team who organized this year's GNU Tools Cauldron we
have prepared a short survey to help us to plan future GNU Tools
Cauldrons. This has already been sent directly to everyone who
attended this year's meeting, but I am posting it her
On Sep 16, 2015, at 12:02 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
wrote:
> Where Joseph said he'd wait some more.. I had thought I asked longer ago than
> that, time flies if one has fun.
>
> I'd just require 1.5.3 just to avoid the time needed by folks to workaround
> those silly ordering gotchas and lo
On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 11:27 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Sep 16, 2015, at 9:25 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan
> wrote:
>>
>> Sorry about the obvious (possibly dumb) question.
>
>> Can't we just import a copy of dejagnu each year and install it as part of
>> the source tree?
>
> TL;DR: No.
[snip]
Th
On September 16, 2015 7:39:42 PM GMT+02:00, David Malcolm
wrote:
>On Wed, 2015-09-16 at 10:36 -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
>> On 09/16/2015 10:25 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On 16/09/15 17:14, Mike Stump wrote:
>> >> On Sep 16, 2015, at 12:29 AM, Andreas Schwab
>> >> wrote:
>> >>> M
On September 16, 2015 7:57:03 PM GMT+02:00, Mike Stump
wrote:
>On Sep 16, 2015, at 9:25 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan
> wrote:
>>
>> Sorry about the obvious (possibly dumb) question.
>
>> Can't we just import a copy of dejagnu each year and install it as
>part of the source tree?
>
>TL;DR: No.
>
>We
On 09/16/2015 11:15 AM, Trevor Saunders wrote:
ANd it's not just the kids. As an "old fart" who has used a variety of
mechanisms to manage GCC sources through the decades (including some that
were never officially used), GIT wins hands-down.
and its not just for people who send patches upstrea
On 09/16/2015 10:54 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
On 16 September 2015 at 18:32, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 16 September 2015 at 17:20, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
My impression is that right now one can develop GCC with GIT or SVN (people
are submitting GIT patches all the time). After the con
On Sep 16, 2015, at 9:25 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan
wrote:
>
> Sorry about the obvious (possibly dumb) question.
> Can't we just import a copy of dejagnu each year and install it as part of
> the source tree?
TL;DR: No.
We could, and indeed, some people do engineering that way. We instead dep
On Wed, 2015-09-16 at 10:36 -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 09/16/2015 10:25 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 16/09/15 17:14, Mike Stump wrote:
> >> On Sep 16, 2015, at 12:29 AM, Andreas Schwab
> >> wrote:
> >>> Mike Stump writes:
> >>>
> The software presently works with 1.4.4 and
On 09/16/2015 11:21 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 6:06 PM, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
Hi -
[...]
- rewrite history - use some totally arbitrary, and quickly outdated,
internet identity
I think this is main reason why @gnu.org or @gmail.com style addresses
are prefer
On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 10:36:47AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 09/16/2015 10:25 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
> >
> >
> >On 16/09/15 17:14, Mike Stump wrote:
> >>On Sep 16, 2015, at 12:29 AM, Andreas Schwab
> >>wrote:
> >>>Mike Stump writes:
> >>>
> The software presently works with 1.4.4 a
On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 6:06 PM, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
> Hi -
>
>> [...]
>> >- rewrite history - use some totally arbitrary, and quickly outdated,
>> >internet identity
>
>> I think this is main reason why @gnu.org or @gmail.com style addresses
>> are preferred over employer addresses when there
DJ Delorie wrote:
> > In that case, you might be able to fix the bug by splitting the
> > offending insns into two patterns, one only handling near mems
> > and one handling one far mems, where the near/far-ness of the mem
> > is verified by the *predicate* and not the constraints.
>
> But this m
On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 10:48:13AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 09/16/2015 10:32 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> >On 16 September 2015 at 17:20, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
> >>My impression is that right now one can develop GCC with GIT or SVN (people
> >>are submitting GIT patches all the time). After
Hi -
> [...]
> >- rewrite history - use some totally arbitrary, and quickly outdated,
> >internet identity
> I think this is main reason why @gnu.org or @gmail.com style addresses
> are preferred over employer addresses when there's > 1 address on file.
That makes sense, but how many people are
On 16 September 2015 at 18:48, Jeff Law wrote:
>> Yes, I think so. "The kids" these days all want to use git, not svn.
>> That's harder to do because you have to set up git *and* git-svn.
>
> Right. And I find that dealing with the mixture of git and git-svn to be a
> real PITA.
OK, I was not aw
On 16 September 2015 at 18:32, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 16 September 2015 at 17:20, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
>> My impression is that right now one can develop GCC with GIT or SVN (people
>> are submitting GIT patches all the time). After the conversion, only GIT
>> will be possible. Does thi
On 09/16/2015 10:32 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 16 September 2015 at 17:20, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
My impression is that right now one can develop GCC with GIT or SVN (people
are submitting GIT patches all the time). After the conversion, only GIT
will be possible. Does this actually lower
On 09/16/2015 10:25 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
On 16/09/15 17:14, Mike Stump wrote:
On Sep 16, 2015, at 12:29 AM, Andreas Schwab
wrote:
Mike Stump writes:
The software presently works with 1.4.4 and there aren’t any
changes that require anything newer.
SLES 12 has 1.4.4.
Would be
On 16 September 2015 at 17:20, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
> My impression is that right now one can develop GCC with GIT or SVN (people
> are submitting GIT patches all the time). After the conversion, only GIT
> will be possible. Does this actually lower the entry barrier and will
> attract contri
On 16/09/15 17:14, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Sep 16, 2015, at 12:29 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
>> Mike Stump writes:
>>
>>> The software presently works with 1.4.4 and there aren’t any changes
>>> that require anything newer.
>>
>> SLES 12 has 1.4.4.
>
> Would be nice to cover them as well, but th
On 16/09/15 17:49, paul_kon...@dell.com wrote:
On Sep 16, 2015,@4:38 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015@7:09 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
...
Unlike Subversion branch deletion, Git branch deletion is permanent,
so this might not be the best option.
We could have a 2nd git reposit
On Sep 16, 2015, at 12:29 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Mike Stump writes:
>
>> The software presently works with 1.4.4 and there aren’t any changes
>> that require anything newer.
>
> SLES 12 has 1.4.4.
Would be nice to cover them as well, but their update schedule, 3-4 years,
means that their
On Wed, 16 Sep 2015, paul_kon...@dell.com wrote:
>
> > On Sep 16, 2015, at 4:38 AM, Richard Biener
> > wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 7:09 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> >> ...
> >> Unlike Subversion branch deletion, Git branch deletion is permanent,
> >> so this might not be the best op
> On Sep 16, 2015, at 4:38 AM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 7:09 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> ...
>> Unlike Subversion branch deletion, Git branch deletion is permanent,
>> so this might not be the best option.
>
> We could have a 2nd git repository just containing dele
On 09/16/2015 09:26 AM, Andrew Cagney wrote:
On 15 September 2015 at 21:36, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
cagney = Andrew Cagney
cag...@gnu.org?
Good point. The email identities of people change over time; forcing
a single arbitrary one to label all contributions is at best imprecise
and at wo
On 15 September 2015 at 21:36, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
>
>>> cagney = Andrew Cagney
>> cag...@gnu.org?
>
> Good point. The email identities of people change over time; forcing
> a single arbitrary one to label all contributions is at best imprecise
> and at worse a miscrediting. (This is one wa
On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 1:18 AM, Anders Oleson wrote:
>
> How difficult is it to modify the prologs that get generated? I think
> I found the code that does that in i386.c and i386.md, but it is
> pretty cryptic to me. Any pointers? I know exactly what I want the
> assembler to look like. If so I
On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 12:07 AM, Matthew Fortune
wrote:
> H.J. Lu writes:
>> On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 2:45 PM, Matthew Fortune
>> wrote:
>> > H.J. Lu writes:
>> >> On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 10:37 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> >> > The interrupt and exception handlers are called by x86 processors. X86
>>
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 7:09 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Jason Merrill:
>
>> There are lots of ancient branches and tags in the SVN repository that
>> are no longer interesting, and it would be nice not to have them
>> cluttering up the lists and default fetch set.
>
> Just one minor comment: Du
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 7:09 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Jason Merrill:
>
>> There are lots of ancient branches and tags in the SVN repository that
>> are no longer interesting, and it would be nice not to have them
>> cluttering up the lists and default fetch set.
>
> Just one minor comment: Du
...
>> Summary:
>> prolog overhead, no call to __morestack : < 1 clock
>> stock call to __morestack (hot): > 4000 clocks
>> without signal blocking: < 60 clocks
>> potential best case: < 6 clocks
>
> This sounds great.
The data structure I was experimenting with ended up to be not very
dif
Mike Stump writes:
> The software presently works with 1.4.4 and there aren’t any changes
> that require anything newer.
SLES 12 has 1.4.4.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, SUSE Labs, sch...@suse.de
GPG Key fingerprint = 0196 BAD8 1CE9 1970 F4BE 1748 E4D4 88E3 0EEA B9D7
"And now for something com
H.J. Lu writes:
> On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 2:45 PM, Matthew Fortune
> wrote:
> > H.J. Lu writes:
> >> On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 10:37 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> >> > The interrupt and exception handlers are called by x86 processors. X86
> >> > hardware puts information on stack and calls the handler. T
38 matches
Mail list logo
