From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 70254 invoked by alias); 30 Sep 2019 16:46:04 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 70044 invoked by uid 89); 30 Sep 2019 16:46:04 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=seek, hunting, visit X-HELO: postbox.isd.glam.ac.uk Received: from postbox.isd.glam.ac.uk (HELO postbox.isd.glam.ac.uk) (81.87.34.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Mon, 30 Sep 2019 16:46:02 +0000 Received: from j228-gm.comp.glam.ac.uk ([193.63.148.84]) by postbox.isd.glam.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iEyoC-0004rw-9Z; Mon, 30 Sep 2019 17:46:00 +0100 From: Gaius Mulley To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: state of play/strategy for including Modula-2 into the trunk (licence queries) Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2019 16:46:00 -0000 Message-ID: <878sq5ybp3.fsf@j228-gm.comp.glam.ac.uk> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2019-09/txt/msg00260.txt.bz2 Hello, I thought I'd seek advice on how to get the Modula-2 front end into trunk and also give a state of play. State of play ============= Currently the gm2-trunk passes all but one regression test on amd64. Other architectures/platforms vary. In early September the whole number overflow detection was completed, which was the final ISO feature required. The compiler and libraries completely implement the ISO standard. The good news is that the focus is now bug hunting/fixing/maintainance and updating all boiler-plates. I'm currently semi-manually walking the source tree updating all GPL boiler-plates. All compiler source files have been changed to GPL3. http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/gm2.git/tree/gcc-versionno/gcc/gm2/gm2-compiler All library source files have been changed to GPL3 with runtime exception in these directories: http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/gm2.git/tree/gcc-versionno/gcc/gm2/gm2-libs http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/gm2.git/tree/gcc-versionno/gcc/gm2/gm2-libs-min http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/gm2.git/tree/gcc-versionno/gcc/gm2/gm2-libs-pim http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/gm2.git/tree/gcc-versionno/gcc/gm2/gm2-libs-iso http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/gm2.git/tree/gcc-versionno/gcc/gm2/gm2-libs-coroutines http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/gm2.git/tree/gcc-versionno/gcc/gm2/gm2-libiberty http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/gm2.git/tree/gcc-versionno/gcc/gm2/gm2-libs-ch Is this correct? Without wishing to seem presumptuous - is it preferred to use the project name GCC or stick with GNU Modula-2? (I still need to visit: http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/gm2.git/tree/gcc-versionno/libgm2) gm2 does use GNU libpth (to create context and switch contexts). Although it doesn't need libpth for single process programs. I think the GNU libpth project is no longer maintained, so I've included it in: http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/gm2.git/tree/gcc-versionno/libgm2/libpth/pth I assuming this is okay as it is an official GNU project? It contains the important clause: > This library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or > modify it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public > License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either > version 2.1 of the License, or (at your option) any later version. in its source files - so I plan to bump this to GPL3 with runtime exception. Is this sensible and what is expected? Anyway I thought it best to ask these questions even though there is still a little way to go - but the finishing line is in sight! (In terms of visiting each and every file and checking the boiler-plates). I've yet to tackle the regression test directory and the examples directory. I also need to check all Makefiles, script files and double check the texi files. Once the tree of source file visiting is complete, how should I proceed? My default plan would be to work on the compiler driver patches again after applying the changes advised. If/when they go through ask for a review of the tree for inclusion: http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/gm2.git/tree/gcc-versionno again is this sensible? Are there [obvious] issues I've missed? What would you prefer? many thanks, regards, Gaius