From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26697 invoked by alias); 12 May 2014 17:10:54 -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 26679 invoked by uid 89); 12 May 2014 17:10:53 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-Spam-User: qpsmtpd, 3 recipients X-HELO: shepard.synsport.net Received: from mail.synsport.com (HELO shepard.synsport.net) (208.69.230.148) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Mon, 12 May 2014 17:10:52 +0000 Received: from [192.168.0.20] (unknown [130.255.19.191]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by shepard.synsport.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D78F435C7; Mon, 12 May 2014 12:10:25 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <53710071.9040901@marino.st> Date: Mon, 12 May 2014 17:10:00 -0000 From: John Marino User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jeff Law , "Joseph S. Myers" CC: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Jonathan Wakely , Gerald Pfeifer , manu@gcc.gnu.org, "Eric Botcazou (gnu.org)" Subject: Re: Contributing new gcc targets: i386-*-dragonfly and x86-64-*-dragonfly References: <5352D100.9040108@marino.st> <5362DC9B.8090709@marino.st> <5363E0F4.4060900@marino.st> <53649694.6050508@marino.st> <536C671F.4080100@redhat.com> <536C8059.8090304@marino.st> <5370FDD9.8030802@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <5370FDD9.8030802@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2014-05/txt/msg00800.txt.bz2 On 5/12/2014 18:59, Jeff Law wrote: > On 05/09/14 01:14, John Marino wrote: >> >> 1) Patch updated online as requested >> 2) At this exact point in time, we probably can share the files >> 3) I might debate that we should share the files - that would imply >> reviewing the existing counterpart files for NetBSD and OpenBSD and >> combining when equivalent. > Let's go ahead and keep the files separate. We can always go back and > combine them at a later date if we see the need. > > So with that in mind, the patch is good to go with the gnat thread stuff > removed. > > Do you have write access, or do you you need someone to commit the > change for you? Thanks, Jeff! I do not have write access, but jwakely has graciously offered to commit this patchset when it achieves approval, so I guess he's on deck! John