On Thu, 1 Apr 2021, 01:05 Giacomo Tesio, wrote:
>
> People all over the world, whatever their country, should be sure to be
> treated fairly and equally by the GCC leaders even if they want to
> contribute something that does not match the culture or interests you
> represent.
&
On Thu, 1 Apr 2021 at 10:13, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, 1 Apr 2021, 01:05 Giacomo Tesio, wrote:
>>
>>
>> People all over the world, whatever their country, should be sure to be
>> treated fairly and equally by the GCC leaders even if they want to
&
Hello,
just trying one more time. Any direction or hint is appreciated. Just
as a note, I looked at the ipa-devirt as an inspiration for these
small functions I wrote, but for some reason I can't read what I
assume have written to the summaries. (What I'm trying to do is simply
use LTO using a rea
implementation on IPA-PTA should be
something like:
1. LGEN: in summaries store the constraint variables that GCC is
finding by inspecting gimple
2. WPA: actually solve the constraint variables and store only the
solutions to the constraint variables in another summary
3. LTRANS: read from the summary
On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 2:50 PM Erick Ochoa via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> just a high level question. I know that IPA-PTA is a SIMPLE_IPA_PASS
> and that ideally it would be better as an IPA_PASS. I understand that
> one of the biggest challenges of changing IPA-PTA to an IPA_PAS
>
> I don't think this would remove any problem that is present.
>
I have a problem understanding what you mean here because later on you state:
> Now - the reason you think of is likely that IPA transform will instantiate
> IPA clones and do inlining and transfering the IPA PTA solution to the
>
On April 1, 2021 3:52:37 PM GMT+02:00, Erick Ochoa wrote:
>>
>> I don't think this would remove any problem that is present.
>>
>
>I have a problem understanding what you mean here because later on you
>state:
>
>> Now - the reason you think of is likely that IPA transform will
>instantiate
>> IPA
On April 1, 2021 5:23:25 PM GMT+02:00, "Andrea G. Monaco"
wrote:
>
>I strongly disagree with the removal of Dr. Stallman from the Steering
>Committee.
>
>Not only RMS wrote the GCC initially, but I think he is the best person
>by far who can guarantee the values of f
On Thu, 2021-04-01 at 17:23 +0200, Andrea G. Monaco wrote:
>
> I strongly disagree with the removal of Dr. Stallman from the
> Steering
> Committee.
RMS was not removed from the GCC Steering Committee; his name was
removed from the *web page* of the steering committee.
Based on th
Richard Biener wrote:
On April 1, 2021 4:08:21 PM GMT+02:00, Eric Botcazou
wrote:
I have so far bootstrapped and tested the release candidate on
x86_64-linux. Please test it and report any issues to bugzilla.
On x86 Darwin, a lot of new libstdc++ experimental/filesystem fails.
https://gc
and report any issues to bugzilla.
>
> On x86 Darwin, a lot of new libstdc++ experimental/filesystem fails.
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99875
I missed a backport, this is needed for gcc-10 branch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gcc-gitref.cgi?r=r11-7239
Only affects th
On April 1, 2021 9:49:19 PM GMT+02:00, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc
wrote:
>On Thu, 1 Apr 2021 at 20:23, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>>
>> Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>> > On April 1, 2021 4:08:21 PM GMT+02:00, Eric Botcazou
>> > wrote:
>> >>> I have s
On Thu, 1 Apr 2021 at 21:08, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On April 1, 2021 9:49:19 PM GMT+02:00, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc
> wrote:
> >On Thu, 1 Apr 2021 at 20:23, Iain Sandoe wrote:
> >>
> >> Richard Biener wrote:
> >>
> >> > On April 1,
On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 08:49:19PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Apr 2021 at 20:23, Iain Sandoe wrote:
> >
> > Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> > > On April 1, 2021 4:08:21 PM GMT+02:00, Eric Botcazou
> > > wrote:
> > >>> I hav
On 01.04.21 22:33, Joseph Myers wrote:
And while in that case RMS probably learned of modules and libcody through
the SC mailing list, in general he has this habit of asking GNU package
developers random questions related to their packages.
I've been asked a few questions about gfortran by ra
I bootstrap built and tested for powerpc 64 on power 7 and 8 BE and
power 8, 9, and 10 LE and I saw nothing unexpected.
On 4/1/21 7:35 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
The first release candidate for GCC 10.3 is available from
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/10.3.0-RC-20210401/
ftp
> If RMS had ever done the same (pretty unlikely, Fortran isnt't his
> thing), I would have done the same without thinking twice about it.
I agree with that sentiment. The fact that somebody has a certain
role doesn't necessarily mean that the question is asked with that hat
on: it may be nothing
On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 09:37:26AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 4/1/21 2:35 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> > The first release candidate for GCC 10.3 is available from
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/10.3.0-RC-20210401/
> > ftp://gcc.gn
Hi Arthur,
On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 5:56 AM Arthur Gautier
wrote:
>
> Dear GCC development team,
>
> We've been trying to build reproducibly the minimal NixOS image, and
> gcc was one of the last issues we had.
> We found that disabling profiled bootstrap compilation of GC
brute developers inherited to then
screw up.
More progress was done with Richard Stallman than at any later time - the
really important things anyway.
Furthermore, there would not have been any public focused cryptography
if it was not for Richard Stallman. I can do what I want with GCC without
the
On Fri, 2 Apr 2021 at 11:06, Giacomo Tesio wrote:
> But from outside your "cultural bubble", we all see that a bunch of
> highly controversial [3][4] US corporations (with long term ties with
> the USA DoD [5]) are kicking out of the GCC Steering Committee their
> only connec
On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 8:25 AM Kaylee Blake wrote:
>
> On 7/8/20 10:41 pm, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 6:42 PM Kaylee Blake wrote:
> >>
> >> On 2/5/20 11:49 pm, H.J. Lu wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 6:46 PM Kaylee Blake via Binutils
> >>> wrote:
>
> On 19/3/20 12:
> Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2021 at 2:06 AM
> From: "Giacomo Tesio"
> To: "Jonathan Wakely"
> Cc: "gcc@gcc.gnu.org" , "Nathan Sidwell"
> Subject: Re: RMS removed from the GCC Steering Committee
>
> Dear Jonathan,
>
> ever
Hi,
On Fri, 2021-04-02 at 06:45 -0700, H.J. Lu via Gcc wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 8:25 AM Kaylee Blake wrote:
> > I needed clarification on some of the language in the contract, and with
> > them being so busy that has been taking a while. They've confirmed it'
Hi Arthur,
On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 5:04 PM Arthur Gautier
wrote:
>
> Hi Tadeus,
>
> On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 9:07 AM Tadeus Prastowo
> wrote:
[...]
> > Since an optimized build is likely to be machine-dependent regardless
> > of any intended injection (e.g., differe
On 01/04/2021 13:35, Richard Biener wrote:
The first release candidate for GCC 10.3 is available from
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/10.3.0-RC-20210401/
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/10.3.0-RC-20210401/
and shortly its mirrors. It has been generated from git commit
es, which affects
> the stagefeedback compilation.
By saying "up to the stageprofile I get the same result", do you mean
that you obtain the same stageprofile compilers on two different
architectures? Or, do you mean that you obtain the same stageprofile
compilers on the same machine b
On Sat, 3 Apr 2021 at 00:53, Richard Copley via Gcc wrote:
>
> On 01/04/2021 13:35, Richard Biener wrote:
> > The first release candidate for GCC 10.3 is available from
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/10.3.0-RC-20210401/
> > ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gc
Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:
On Sat, 3 Apr 2021 at 00:53, Richard Copley via Gcc
wrote:
On 01/04/2021 13:35, Richard Biener wrote:
The first release candidate for GCC 10.3 is available from
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/10.3.0-RC-20210401/
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots
If you have nothing to contribute except these diatribes, please give it a
rest.
If you really think "being American" is a bigger image problem than "being
RMS" then you are part of the problem here.
On 03/04/2021 13:25, Iain Sandoe wrote:
Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:
On Sat, 3 Apr 2021 at 00:53, Richard Copley via Gcc
wrote:
On 01/04/2021 13:35, Richard Biener wrote:
The first release candidate for GCC 10.3 is available from
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/10.3.0-RC-20210401
As we have expressed, the GCC Steering Committee doesn't micromanage
the development of GCC. The technical decisions are made by the
Release Managers and the various maintainers. But if you want to play
nationality bingo, let's play and see what we find, shall we?
The three GCC Releas
Hi,
The default debug format (when using only -g) for the AVR target is
stabs. Is there a reason for it not being DWARF, and would it be
possible to maybe consider possibly thinking about making it default to
DWARF? I am asking because the support for stabs in GDB is pretty much
untested and bit
On Sun, 4 Apr 2021, 00:46 Ian Lance Taylor via Gcc, wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 3, 2021 at 10:31 AM Giacomo Tesio wrote:
> >
> > But apparently you cannot decide which US-corporation should be thrown.
> > (indeed US-corporations hold the vast majoirity of SC heads, right now).
>
On 03/04/2021 22:12, Richard Copley wrote:
On Windows, linking two C++ translation units that both #include
results in errors about multiple definition of the weak
function __dummy_resume_destroy. This can be avoided by cherry-picking
commit 94fd05f1f76faca9dc9033b55d44c960155d38e9 [PR 95917].
> I'm scared by the dangerous influence that dangeours US corporations
> and a dangerous military nation with a long history of human rights
> violations (see Snowden's and Assange's revelations and the ongoing
> Assange's trial) HAVE over the GCC development.
I
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2021 at 1:10 AM
> From: "Giacomo Tesio"
> To: "Ian Lance Taylor"
> Cc: "GCC Development" , "Nathan Sidwell"
> Subject: Re: RMS removed from the GCC Steering Committee
>
> Ian,
>
> with all respect wi
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2021 at 1:10 AM
> From: "Giacomo Tesio"
> To: "Ian Lance Taylor"
> Cc: "GCC Development" , "Nathan Sidwell"
> Subject: Re: RMS removed from the GCC Steering Committee
>
> Ian,
>
> with all respect wi
eir time, not by groups like the SC or the maintainers.
> > > Except that the President of FSF (and Chief GNUissance himself) was
> > > receiving copy of all the communications of the Steering Committee.
> >
> > Do we know this as a fact?
>
> Ian wrote so
On Sun, 4 Apr 2021, 12:40 Richard Copley, wrote:
> On 03/04/2021 22:12, Richard Copley wrote:
> On Windows, linking two C++ translation units that both #include
> results in errors about multiple definition of the weak
> function __dummy_resume_destroy. This can be avoided by cher
On Thu, 1 Apr 2021 at 14:35, Richard Biener wrote:
>
>
> The first release candidate for GCC 10.3 is available from
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/10.3.0-RC-20210401/
> ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/10.3.0-RC-20210401/
>
> and shortly its mirrors. It
On 2021-04-05 3:36 p.m., Jim Wilson wrote:> On Sat, Apr 3, 2021 at 6:24 PM
Simon Marchi via Gcc mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>> wrote:
>
> The default debug format (when using only -g) for the AVR target is
> stabs. Is there a reason for it not being DWARF, and would it be
On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 9:21 PM Ian Lance Taylor via Gcc wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 10:08 AM Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> >
> > Richard Biener pointed out dysfunction in the SC. The case of the
> > missing question I asked in 2019 also points to that. This response
&g
On Mon, Apr 5, 2021 at 10:56 PM Simon Marchi via Gcc wrote:
>
> On 2021-04-05 3:36 p.m., Jim Wilson wrote:> On Sat, Apr 3, 2021 at 6:24 PM
> Simon Marchi via Gcc mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>> wrote:
> >
> > The default debug format (when using only -g) for the AV
Dear reader,
My name is Mihnea Robert Gogu and it is my pleasure to confirm my
application for GSoC 2021, more specifically taking on a task as part of
the gcc rust compiler. I am a second year Computing student at Imperial
College London, most passionate about programming languages, by extension
).
It was comparatively harder to find such an example where it would fail as
looks like gcc do amazingly nice job at devirtualising the function calls (
even with -O0 option ) but finally after a lot of attempts and reading online
about devirtualisation, I found this particular example where
f C codes, I switched to C++
> programs in-order to find how exactly the analyzer doesn’t
> understand exception handling and more interestingly calls to virtual
> functions ( which I am thinking to work on this summer ).
Sounds like a good focus.
> It was comparatively harder to find s
Hi Martin,
thanks for taking some time to help me. I think I accidentally deleted
the original hello world pass, but I have re-made it and I still have
the same problem. I copy paste the patch at the bottom. Just to give
some more context:
I am running the following command:
$PATH_TO_GCC/gcc
egative; is it possible to give
> a simple example of a false positive? (I think "new" is meant to raise
> an exception if it fails, so a diagnostics about a NULL-deref on
> unchecked new might be a false positive. I'm not sure)
>
I tried the following example:
#include
> Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2021 at 10:22 AM
> From: "Mark Wielaard"
> To: "Jonathan Wakely"
> Cc: "GCC Development"
> Subject: GCC association with the FSF
>
> Hi,
>
> Lets change the subject now that this is about GCC and the FS
Hi everyone,
It is my pleasure to announce that I will be applying for the Google Summer
of Code in order to work under the Rust-GCC organization.
I am a french systems programming and embedded systems programming student,
and love to work on anything related to the compilation or interpretation
On Wed, 2021-04-07 at 00:22 +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Lets change the subject now that this is about GCC and the FSF.
>
> On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 01:46:29PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc
> wrote:
> > Probably unintentionally, but he has allowed the GNU Pro
On Wed, 2021-04-07 at 10:51 -0400, Alfred M. Szmidt via Gcc wrote:
> [...] That "gnu-stucture" document was written by RMS a couple of
> months ago and doesn't represent how the GNU project and its
> maintainers have worked for years.
>
> It reflects the s
On Wed, 7 Apr 2021 at 17:28, John Darrington wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 11:15:14AM -0400, David Malcolm via Gcc wrote:
> I don't think you get to speak for who is or is not a member of the GNU
> project. As far as I know, "GNU" isn't trademarke
inted "chief GNUisance". I hope the FSF can be saved, since
> it would be extremely inconvenient to have to move.
This matches my feelings. If the FSF can be saved, fine, but I don't
think GCC needs to remain associated with it.
If the GNU name is a problem, rename the pr
On 4/7/2021 11:17 AM, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:
On Wed, 7 Apr 2021 at 15:04, David Malcolm wrote:
For myself, I'm interested in copyleft low-level tools being used to
build a Free Software operating system, but the "GNU" name may be
permanently tarnished for me; I hav
On Wed, 2021-04-07 at 18:24 +0200, John Darrington wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 11:15:14AM -0400, David Malcolm via Gcc
> wrote:
>
> > It reflects the same message that has been sent to new GNU
> > maintainers
> > for the decades. The GNU structur
On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 6:34 AM Richard Biener via Gcc wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 5, 2021 at 10:56 PM Simon Marchi via Gcc wrote:
> >
> > On 2021-04-05 3:36 p.m., Jim Wilson wrote:> On Sat, Apr 3, 2021 at 6:24 PM
> > Simon Marchi via Gcc mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>> w
of the
> analyzed statement.
When we process a node in the worklist, we only ever add successor
nodes, recording the next pairs.
> For example, In the memory leak examples discussed
> here, if at a statement I see a *new *expression, then I need to add
> all
> the nodes where
On April 8, 2021 1:17:53 AM GMT+02:00, David Edelsohn wrote:
>On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 6:34 AM Richard Biener via Gcc
>wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 5, 2021 at 10:56 PM Simon Marchi via Gcc
> wrote:
>> >
>> > On 2021-04-05 3:36 p.m., Jim Wilson wrote:> On Sat
tions
used by GCC so that we could perform feature extraction and then use it to
train the model. There was not enough information about all the IR stages
of GCC available online.
Could you please guide us to it if it is already present i.e we need some
documentation about the different stages of IR
> Having one guy at the top from whom all power flows.
>
> Power does not "flow" from RMS. Since you have used a political analogy:
> I think it is more akin to a constitutional monarchy.
I think it's like the Queen of England. As a British person I used to
know said: "The Queen of England
On Thu, Apr 8, 2021 at 2:03 AM Richard Biener
wrote:
>
> On April 8, 2021 1:17:53 AM GMT+02:00, David Edelsohn
> wrote:
> >On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 6:34 AM Richard Biener via Gcc
> >wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, Apr 5, 2021 at 10:56 PM Simon Marchi via Gcc
>
On Thu, Apr 8, 2021 at 8:03 AM Richard Biener
wrote:
>
> On April 8, 2021 1:17:53 AM GMT+02:00, David Edelsohn
> wrote:
> >On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 6:34 AM Richard Biener via Gcc
> >wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, Apr 5, 2021 at 10:56 PM Simon Marchi via Gcc
>
On 2021-04-08 9:11 a.m., David Edelsohn wrote:
>>> AIX continues to use and support STABS, although it is transitioning
>>> to DWARF. If this is intended as a general statement about removal of
>>> STABS support in GCC,
>>
>> Yes, it is.
>>
>>
On 4/8/2021 8:06 AM, Simon Marchi via Gcc wrote:
On 2021-04-08 9:11 a.m., David Edelsohn wrote:
AIX continues to use and support STABS, although it is transitioning
to DWARF. If this is intended as a general statement about removal of
STABS support in GCC,
Yes, it is.
Richard.
Richard
y's
> interest
> but their own.
If we're continuing the political analogy, a counterexample might be
the United States.
> I for one, will not sit back and let that heppen to GNU.
I think it's important to distinguish between the figurative and
literal here.
No one is l
On Thu, Apr 8, 2021 at 10:41 AM Jeff Law wrote:
>
> On 4/8/2021 8:06 AM, Simon Marchi via Gcc wrote:
> > On 2021-04-08 9:11 a.m., David Edelsohn wrote:
> >>>> AIX continues to use and support STABS, although it is transitioning
> >>>> to DWARF. If thi
> Sent: Friday, April 09, 2021 at 3:00 AM
> From: "David Brown"
> To: "Jonathan Wakely" , "David Malcolm"
>
> Cc: "GCC Development" , "Mark Wielaard"
> Subject: Re: GCC association with the FSF
>
> On 07/04/2021 19
On Thu, Apr 8, 2021 at 12:09 PM David Edelsohn wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 8, 2021 at 10:41 AM Jeff Law wrote:
> >
> > On 4/8/2021 8:06 AM, Simon Marchi via Gcc wrote:
> > > On 2021-04-08 9:11 a.m., David Edelsohn wrote:
> > >>>> AIX continues to use an
> Sent: Friday, April 09, 2021 at 6:21 AM
> From: "John Darrington"
> To: "David Malcolm"
> Cc: g...@gnu.org, "Alfred M. Szmidt" , "Mark Wielaard"
>
> Subject: Re: GCC association with the FSF
>
> On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 10:54:25A
On 4/8/21 6:43 PM, Christopher Dimech via Gcc wrote:
Sent: Friday, April 09, 2021 at 3:00 AM
From: "David Brown"
To: "Jonathan Wakely" , "David Malcolm"
Cc: "GCC Development" , "Mark Wielaard"
Subject: Re: GCC association with the FSF
On 07
> Sent: Friday, April 09, 2021 at 7:48 AM
> From: "Mark Wielaard"
> To: "David Malcolm"
> Cc: "GCC Development"
> Subject: Re: GCC association with the FSF
>
> Hi David,
>
> On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 10:04:21AM -0400, David Malcolm wr
On Thu, 2021-04-08 at 20:21 +0200, John Darrington wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 10:54:25AM -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
[...]
> Some of us don't want RMS in a leadership position in a project
> we're
> associated with (be it the FSF or GNU, and thus,
Hello, everyone.
I'd like to contribute to the gccrs project (https://github.com/Rust-GCC/gccrs)
and they require contributions to have copyright assignment in place. Could you
please tell me what I should do and send me the relevant forms?
Thank you in advance.
Ruihan Li
> Sent: Friday, April 09, 2021 at 6:37 PM
> From: "John Darrington"
> To: "David Malcolm"
> Cc: g...@gnu.org, "Alfred M. Szmidt" , "Mark Wielaard"
>
> Subject: Re: GCC association with the FSF
>
> On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 09:
> On Apr 9, 2021, at 2:27 AM, Alfred M. Szmidt via Gcc wrote:
>
> These discussions are slightly off topic for gcc@, I'd suggest they
> are moved to gnu-misc-discuss@ or some other more suitable list.
More than "slightly", in my view. I'm close to putting thi
On Fri, 9 Apr 2021 at 07:30, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
>
> These discussions are slightly off topic for gcc@, I'd suggest they
> are moved to gnu-misc-discuss@ or some other more suitable list.
That list is precisely the toxic cesspit that makes me want to have
nothing more to do
> Sent: Friday, April 09, 2021 at 10:37 PM
> From: "David Brown"
> To: "John Darrington" , "David Malcolm"
>
> Cc: g...@gnu.org
> Subject: Re: GCC association with the FSF
>
> On 09/04/2021 08:37, John Darrington wrote:
>
> >
>
> Sent: Friday, April 09, 2021 at 11:48 PM
> From: "Pankaj Jangid"
> To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: GCC association with the FSF
>
> Gabriel Ravier via Gcc writes:
>
> > RMS is not indispensible because he does not contribute to GCC and
> > do
I have sent my proposal to GSoC about improving the warnings of Rust-GCC
Frontend and more specifically the warnings that are connected with
immutable values .
You can see my full proposal here :
https://docs.google.com/document/d/146zKtk6rEbZV7c5Fomt8VomjG8AnzQ4aULHhnM8hh6M/edit?usp=sharing
Replied privately.
On Fri, Apr 9, 2021 at 8:37 AM Ruihan Li via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hello, everyone.
>
>
>
>
> I'd like to contribute to the gccrs project
> (https://github.com/Rust-GCC/gccrs) and they require contributions to have
> copyright assignment in place.
On 4/9/21 1:48 PM, Pankaj Jangid wrote:
Gabriel Ravier via Gcc writes:
RMS is not indispensible because he does not contribute to GCC and
doesn't bring much to it, and otherwise takes more away from it. If
you were to remove all of Ian, Jonathan, Joseph and Nathan you would
be removin
> Sent: Saturday, April 10, 2021 at 5:01 AM
> From: "David Brown"
> To: "Christopher Dimech"
> Cc: "John Darrington" , "David Malcolm"
> , g...@gnu.org
> Subject: Re: GCC association with the FSF
>
> On 09/04/2021 16:40, Christo
her Dimech"
> Cc: "John Darrington" , "David Malcolm"
> , g...@gnu.org
> Subject: Re: GCC association with the FSF
>
> On 09/04/2021 16:40, Christopher Dimech wrote:
> >> Sent: Friday, April 09, 2021 at 10:37 PM
> >> From: "David Brown"
> Sent: Saturday, April 10, 2021 at 7:37 AM
> From: "Thomas Rodgers"
> To: "Christopher Dimech"
> Cc: "David Brown" , g...@gnu.org
> Subject: Re: GCC association with the FSF
>
> On 2021-04-09 11:02, Christopher Dimech via Gcc wrote:
>
>
> Sent: Saturday, April 10, 2021 at 9:17 AM
> From: "Thomas Rodgers"
> To: "Christopher Dimech"
> Cc: "David Brown" , g...@gnu.org
> Subject: Re: GCC association with the FSF
>
> On 2021-04-09 14:02, Christopher Dimech wrote:
>
> > B
the weird relations some of these companies have had with US
> Government:
>
> https://www.virtualthreat.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/nsa-google-cloud-exploitation.jpg
>
> The implications are left as an exercise for the readers. ;-)
>
You are clueless about what the SC actually
> Sent: Saturday, April 10, 2021 at 10:12 AM
> From: "Giacomo Tesio"
> To: "Ian Lance Taylor"
> Cc: "GCC Development" , g...@gnu.org, "David Brown"
>
> Subject: Re: GCC association with the FSF
>
> Just for the record, I was
> Just for the record, I was not talking about developers but about
> the leadership of the project, Ian.
>
> 8 out of 13 members of the Steering Committee are from US-corporations.
I don't think I'd consider the Steering Committee "the leadership of
the project". In what sense do they "lead" th
在 2021/4/9 下午11:06, David Edelsohn via Gcc 写道:
Replied privately.
Excuse me, but why this has to be done privately? I generally expect there to be such a form that
people may download, fill and submit without public acknowledgements.
Please forgive me if I am being too curious.
--
Best
> Sent: Saturday, April 10, 2021 at 2:53 PM
> From: "Liu Hao"
> To: "Christopher Dimech"
> Cc: g...@gnu.org
> Subject: Re: GCC association with the FSF
>
> 在 2021/4/10 上午2:02, Christopher Dimech via Gcc 写道:
> >
> > It is an assessment
在 2021/4/10 上午2:02, Christopher Dimech via Gcc 写道:
It is an assessment of what you propose. The removal of people from all
positions is a political statements. I have no problem with political
discussions and certainly don't take instructions from you, to say the
least! What you talk
On Sat, 10 Apr 2021, 03:37 Liu Hao via Gcc, wrote:
> 在 2021/4/9 下午11:06, David Edelsohn via Gcc 写道:
> > Replied privately.
> >
>
> Excuse me, but why this has to be done privately? I generally expect there
> to be such a form that
> people may download, fil
Dear mam/sir.
I am Veerpal Kaur, I have good knowledge of HTML, CSS, Bootstrap,
JavaScript, Reactjs, SQL, MySQL, MongoDB, etc. Now I want to contribute to
the GCC Web site and want to make it more user-friendly.
I have one problem that I am unable to find a mentor for this project.
Please mam
On Sat, 10 Apr 2021 at 11:30, Sidney Marshall wrote:
>
> When compiling the last few releases of GCC I get many warnings in
> format strings of the form:
>
> ../../gcc-10.3.0/gcc/analyzer/region-model.cc: In member function
> 'void ana::svalue_id::dump_node_name_to_pp
I've already replied to this user more than once and tried to explain
how to submit patches. I suggest we ignore them now.
On Sat, 10 Apr 2021 at 11:42, Veerpal Kaur via Gcc wrote:
>
> Dear mam/sir.
>
> I am Veerpal Kaur, I have good knowledge of HTML, CSS, Bootstrap,
> Java
在 2021/4/10 下午3:22, Jonathan Wakely 写道:
I don't about David, but the reason I take it off-list is that there is more than one form that
might be appropriate, depending on the contributor's situation. The forms are available online (e.g.
in the gnulib repo) but discussing what is suitable, and
On Sat, 10 Apr 2021, 12:57 Pankaj Jangid, wrote:
> Jonathan Wakely via Gcc writes:
>
> > You are clueless about what the SC actually does, or the control they
> > have over GCC.
>
> I think, it would be great help if someone can document what the SC
> does.
>
htt
Hello there
As a long time GCC user, who is also a father to teenage children, I would
very much prefer if a person who openly expressed opinions, and also openly
exercised behaviours, which I consider abhorrent, was *not* associated with
the GCC project. It does not matter to me what kind of
3201 - 3300 of 10345 matches
Mail list logo
