From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16787 invoked by alias); 13 May 2014 14:10:21 -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 16762 invoked by uid 89); 13 May 2014 14:10:20 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-Spam-User: qpsmtpd, 3 recipients X-HELO: mail-la0-f49.google.com Received: from mail-la0-f49.google.com (HELO mail-la0-f49.google.com) (209.85.215.49) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 13 May 2014 14:10:19 +0000 Received: by mail-la0-f49.google.com with SMTP id pv20so314601lab.22 for ; Tue, 13 May 2014 07:10:16 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.92.172 with SMTP id cn12mr1328012lbb.73.1399990215953; Tue, 13 May 2014 07:10:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.125.202 with HTTP; Tue, 13 May 2014 07:10:15 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <53710158.10305@redhat.com> 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> <53710071.9040901@marino.st> <53710158.10305@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 13 May 2014 14:10:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Contributing new gcc targets: i386-*-dragonfly and x86-64-*-dragonfly From: Jonathan Wakely To: Jeff Law Cc: John Marino , "Joseph S. Myers" , gcc-patches , Gerald Pfeifer , "manu at gcc dot gnu.org" , "Eric Botcazou (gnu.org)" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-SW-Source: 2014-05/txt/msg00974.txt.bz2 On 12 May 2014 18:14, Jeff Law wrote: > On 05/12/14 11:10, John Marino wrote: >> >> 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! > > OK. It's Jon's :-) Great, I'll coordinate with John and aim to get it committed before Friday.