From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: mark@codesourcery.com To: chip@perlsupport.com Cc: egcs@egcs.cygnus.com Subject: Re: Linux and aliasing? Date: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 10:37:00 -0000 Message-id: <19990603104038Z.mitchell@codesourcery.com> References: <19990603131344.W375@perlsupport.com> <19990603131344.W375@perlsupport.com> X-SW-Source: 1999-06/msg00083.html >>>>> "Chip" == Chip Salzenberg writes: Chip> Linus continues to complain on linux-kernel that egcs lacks Chip> a way to *selectively* turn off the new stronger alias Chip> analysis. Is this not easy, or is it just not an important Chip> issue to the egcs team? -- Chip Salzenberg - a.k.a. - Chip> "When do you work?" "Whenever I'm Chip> not busy." It's not easy. And it's not in any way clear that it's the right thing to do. And David Miller (IIRC) indicated that the kernel folks would probably eliminate the non-standard C code in the next major kernel revision. So, no, I don't think it's a priority for us to make any such change. I can't really speak for others, but that's my take on the situation. -- Mark Mitchell mark@codesourcery.com CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: mark@codesourcery.com To: chip@perlsupport.com Cc: egcs@egcs.cygnus.com Subject: Re: Linux and aliasing? Date: Wed, 30 Jun 1999 15:43:00 -0000 Message-ID: <19990603104038Z.mitchell@codesourcery.com> References: <19990603131344.W375@perlsupport.com> X-SW-Source: 1999-06n/msg00083.html Message-ID: <19990630154300.Yb9hb7Jv-2pBeO6GJUQwlRBrxCwnPy5ZpilMGAiruKs@z> >>>>> "Chip" == Chip Salzenberg writes: Chip> Linus continues to complain on linux-kernel that egcs lacks Chip> a way to *selectively* turn off the new stronger alias Chip> analysis. Is this not easy, or is it just not an important Chip> issue to the egcs team? -- Chip Salzenberg - a.k.a. - Chip> "When do you work?" "Whenever I'm Chip> not busy." It's not easy. And it's not in any way clear that it's the right thing to do. And David Miller (IIRC) indicated that the kernel folks would probably eliminate the non-standard C code in the next major kernel revision. So, no, I don't think it's a priority for us to make any such change. I can't really speak for others, but that's my take on the situation. -- Mark Mitchell mark@codesourcery.com CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com