On Mon, 23 Jul 2007, H.J. Lu wrote:
> Here is a patch. We are working on an external libbid open source
> website. I will update it when it is up and running.
Thanks! I believe you'd ment the first sentence to read "The master
sources come from the Intel BID library..."? The patch is fine with
t
On Sun, Jul 22, 2007 at 11:46:59PM +0200, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Jul 2007, Tom Tromey wrote:
> > In this case the library has to follow the external project policy:
> >
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2006-03/msg00558.html
> >
> > It at least needs an entry on the "coding conventions
On Thu, 5 Jul 2007, Tom Tromey wrote:
> In this case the library has to follow the external project policy:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2006-03/msg00558.html
>
> It at least needs an entry on the "coding conventions" page.
Good point. HJ, would you mind updating our coding conventions pag
On Thu, Jul 05, 2007 at 10:58:35AM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> "H.J. Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > > I'm also uncertain as to just who approved the commit of
> > > libgcc/config/libbid into mainline. When I look at the code I see
> >
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2007-06/msg00457.ht
Uros Bizjak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> IMO the situation here is the same as with current soft-fp
> situation. The library should be considered as imported from upstream,
> and the decisions w.r.t formatting are inherited from the upstream. In
> soft-fp case, functions don't have prototypes, an
"H.J. Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I'm also uncertain as to just who approved the commit of
> > libgcc/config/libbid into mainline. When I look at the code I see
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2007-06/msg00457.html
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2007-06/msg00491.html
>
> Both x86 maintainer
> "Uros" == Uros Bizjak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Uros> IMO the situation here is the same as with current soft-fp
Uros> situation. The library should be considered as imported from upstream,
Uros> and the decisions w.r.t formatting are inherited from the
Uros> upstream.
In this case the li
Hello!
I'm also uncertain as to just who approved the commit of
libgcc/config/libbid into mainline. When I look at the code I see
that it is not formatted to the GNU standard, and it includes C++
style comments which we do not normally use in C code.
IMO the situation here is the same as w
I'm also uncertain as to just who approved the commit of
libgcc/config/libbid into mainline. When I look at the code I see
Both x86 maintainer and build/libgcc maintainer reviewed the patch.
Note that build != libgcc maintainer. One may argue whether a libgcc
maintainer's approval is needed
On Thu, Jul 05, 2007 at 09:46:27AM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> "H.J. Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I am checking in this patch to add myself as libbid maintainer.
>
> Normally changes to the list of maintainers are approved by the
> steering committee. I didn't see any notice about
"H.J. Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I am checking in this patch to add myself as libbid maintainer.
Normally changes to the list of maintainers are approved by the
steering committee. I didn't see any notice about this one. I would
just like to confirm that this change was approved.
I'm al
11 matches
Mail list logo
