From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 65832 invoked by alias); 4 Mar 2016 15:27:15 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 65803 invoked by uid 89); 4 Mar 2016 15:27:14 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=ASAP, responsive, meeting, HContent-Transfer-Encoding:8bit X-Spam-User: qpsmtpd, 2 recipients X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 04 Mar 2016 15:27:13 +0000 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 48BEF64D28; Fri, 4 Mar 2016 15:27:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (ovpn-116-44.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.44]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u24FRA2M029079; Fri, 4 Mar 2016 10:27:11 -0500 Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2016 15:27:00 -0000 From: Jonathan Wakely To: Mike Stump Cc: Maxim Kuvyrkov , GCC Patches , libstdc++ Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix detection of setrlimit in libstdc++ testsuite Message-ID: <20160304152710.GC28835@redhat.com> References: <28F74808-E037-4192-BB5E-A0492BE31172@linaro.org> <9B4A743A-A0A2-4B3F-8564-36685071C1C8@linaro.org> <320A223B-8E93-4938-BFA1-E61809101245@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-SW-Source: 2016-03/txt/msg00363.txt.bz2 On 02/03/16 09:38 -0800, Mike Stump wrote: >On Mar 2, 2016, at 2:08 AM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote: >> PING ^ 2. The patch is sitting without comments for 4+ months. > >So the libstdc++ people are usually pretty active and responsive, I usually let them review these sorts of patches as domain experts. I only kick in if they are unreasonably absent. Reviewing the case, I don’t see any hint that the libstdc++ list was ever sent an email. You will want to include it in any patches and pings. Thanks for forwarding this, Mike. Libstdc++ patches need to be sent to the libstdc++ list, see both https://gcc.gnu.org/lists.html and https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/manual/appendix_contributing.html#list.patches I don't comment on patches I'm not aware of :-) >I did look at the patch, and it does seem reasonable. Given that the libstdc+ folks never saw it, I’lll defer to them. You can ping patches once a week, if you would like. Paolo and I are both attending the WG21 C++ meeting this week. I'm busy and have not had much time to keep up with email, but I'll review the patch ASAP.