https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28441
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28441
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||matz at gcc dot gnu.org,
--- Comment #14 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-22 18:16
---
Any news on the review?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28441
--- Comment #13 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-14 23:03
---
Note that Michael Matz commited a patch to solve the problem independently.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-03/msg00950.html
I hope it will get into mainline in few days.
Honza
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bu
--- Comment #12 from gnb at melbourne dot sgi dot com 2007-01-10 01:25
---
Today I received a notification from the copyright-clerk:
> Hello Greg,
>
>
--- Comment #11 from gnb at melbourne dot sgi dot com 2006-12-06 20:49
---
(In reply to comment #10)
> [...] the employer disclaimer, which will need to go
> back across the Pacific and up through some layers of corporate
> bureaucracy.
I'm told this document was signed yesterday, so I
--- Comment #10 from gnb at sgi dot com 2006-07-31 01:18 ---
Ian: understood and agreed.
FYI: the copyright assignment arrived in this morning's mail.
I'll need to run it past my lawyer (as I do any legal document)
but I don't expect that will take long. The bottleneck is
likely to be
--- Comment #9 from ian at airs dot com 2006-07-29 05:21 ---
It is safest to avoid posting the patch to a gcc mailing list before the
copyright assignment is signed. It protects us in the (hopefully unlikely)
case that the copyright assignment never does get signed. Otherwise we have a
--- Comment #8 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-29 00:41 ---
Is it necessary to wait with posting until the copyright assignment process is
finished, or can the patch be posted for a first review before the assignment
is on file?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-26 00:28 ---
Confirmed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|norma
--- Comment #6 from gnb at sgi dot com 2006-07-24 02:23 ---
Ian Lance Taylor says:
> Please send e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] first. When that process is
> complete, send the patch to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thanks, that was the guidance I needed ;-) The process is underway.
Seongbae Park s
--- Comment #5 from seongbae dot park at gmail dot com 2006-07-23 17:27
---
It seems that you didn't change libgcov.c,
which suggests that you didn't address __gcov_{pow2,interval}_profiler.
Without such change, -fprofile-generate will cause the mismatch between
the value counters and e
--- Comment #4 from ian at airs dot com 2006-07-21 18:05 ---
Please send e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] first. When that process is
complete, send the patch to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thanks!
--
ian at airs dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #3 from bangerth at dealii dot org 2006-07-20 03:45 ---
That's an important contribution, and I want to encourage you not to get
discouraged by the lengthy process of getting a copyright assignment and
then patch review. Please hang tight, this is a patch that others will
als
--- Comment #2 from gnb at sgi dot com 2006-07-20 01:51 ---
Thanks Andrew,
> Also please read http://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html if you have not already.
I have read that, and while it does mention all the requirements it left
me confused about I should do to start the process. Should
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-20 01:09 ---
Patches go to gcc-patches@ anyways.
Also please read http://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html if you have not already.
Yes this does legally significant. Oher than I am not a lawyer and this is not
legal advice.
--
16 matches
Mail list logo
