From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19269 invoked by alias); 20 Nov 2012 19:09:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 19210 invoked by uid 22791); 20 Nov 2012 19:09:53 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED,TW_BF X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net (HELO shards.monkeyblade.net) (149.20.54.216) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 20 Nov 2012 19:09:33 +0000 Received: from localhost (cpe-66-108-117-132.nyc.res.rr.com [66.108.117.132]) by shards.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D241958421A; Tue, 20 Nov 2012 11:09:34 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 19:09:00 -0000 Message-Id: <20121120.140931.714646332681160779.davem@davemloft.net> To: konstantin.s.serebryany@gmail.com Cc: bergner@vnet.ibm.com, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, ebotcazou@adacore.com, dje.gcc@gmail.com, wmi@google.com, dvyukov@google.com Subject: Re: sparc bootstrap still broken From: David Miller In-Reply-To: References: <1353434880.17833.113.camel@otta> <20121120.131418.1084979899200910515.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2012-11/txt/msg01699.txt.bz2 From: Konstantin Serebryany Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 23:02:36 +0400 > I really need your help to resolve this mess. I thought it was abundantly clear that the burdon falls upon the ASAN folks, since they are the ones who care about the external dependency. Nobody else inside of the GCC community cares about that. Other examples of identical situations were given, including libffi and GO. Where it is %100 up to the maintainer of those modules to deal with the merge hassles created by the external dependency, and to shield the GCC development process completely from any part of that. Finally, a bugzilla entry with a very limited audience is absolutely not the appropriate place to discuss this issue. The GCC mailing lists are.