> I'd like to know if someone with better automake skills than I have
> can do anything about that warning, but otherwise that looks OK to me,
> thanks.
Hey dude. Caroline and I are working off-line on this.
-benjamin
On 08/03/2013 00:11, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 7 March 2013 23:53, Caroline Tice wrote:
>> I believe this patch addresses all of your comments; I modified the
>> configure.ac files to generate the configures, and I fixed the
>> spelling mistakes in the comments. I still get the warnings when
>>
On 7 March 2013 23:53, Caroline Tice wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I believe this patch addresses all of your comments; I modified the
> configure.ac files to generate the configures, and I fixed the
> spelling mistakes in the comments. I still get the warnings when
> generating the Makefile.in files from t
On 25 February 2013 22:43, Caroline Tice wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 1:14 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>
>> Was configure regenerated of modified by hand? When regenerating it
>> with Autoconf 2.64 I get a different output.
>>
>
> I modified the configure file by hand. I didn't realize it was
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 1:14 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 25 February 2013 19:52, Caroline Tice wrote:
>> I got too excited about being done and forgot to attach the patch. :-(
>> Sorry. Here it is.
>
> Some comments follow, mostly from reading the comments to understand
> what this patch does
On 25 February 2013 19:52, Caroline Tice wrote:
> I got too excited about being done and forgot to attach the patch. :-(
> Sorry. Here it is.
Some comments follow, mostly from reading the comments to understand
what this patch does, it's a really interesting feature!
The generated files (configu
Here are the latest changes to the vtable pointer verification patches
(again there are 3 patches: c++ front end, main gcc, and c++ runtime
library). I think these address all the review comments I have
received so far. This patch is the for C++ runtime library changes.
Please review these change
