Re: GCC maintainer volunteer?

[JonY <10walls@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1436 bytes --]

On 2/22/2013 00:59, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Feb 21 11:31, Chris Sutcliffe wrote:
>> On 21 February 2013 10:38, NightStrike wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>>> On Feb 21 21:33, JonY wrote:
>>>>> On 2/21/2013 20:40, NightStrike wrote:
>>>>>>> I've started looking at the patches, they definitely aren't trivial.
>>>>>>> I'll probably be releasing it as experimental.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There are local cygwin patches to gcc?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, about 100KB of it. I confess I don't know what most of is for, my
>>>>> understanding of the gcc internals are limited.
>>>>
>>>> I assume some (or all) of them are already upstream, but they were not
>>>> backported into the 4.5.x branch.  It might be a good idea to start out
>>>> with a clean upstream build and then look into the patches if they still
>>>> make some sense.
>>>
>>> Are they in 4.6?  If so, why not just start fresh and clean with a 4.6
>>> 'chain that needs zero patching?
>>
>> I believe Corinna means going to later version of GCC, preferably
>> straight to 4.7 would be great.
> 
> Exactly.  The question is then, what patches from the 4.5.3 gcc were
> not applied upstream and still make sense today.
> 

I have not looked at all the patches closely, but some of them were not
merged in gcc-4.7.2, at least the peflags patch did not.

Who is the upstream GCC maintainer for Cygwin anyway?



[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 834 bytes --]