From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14547 invoked by alias); 3 May 2016 14:39:44 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libffi-discuss-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libffi-discuss-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 14535 invoked by uid 89); 3 May 2016 14:39:43 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=repos, Hx-languages-length:1134, HTo:U*libffi-discuss, trusted 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; Tue, 03 May 2016 14:39:41 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 884D47F0B1; Tue, 3 May 2016 14:39:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bigtime.twiddle.net (ovpn-113-48.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.48]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u43Edcgi005958; Tue, 3 May 2016 10:39:39 -0400 Subject: Re: libffi maintenance To: Andrew Haley , Anthony Green , "libffi-discuss@sourceware.org" References: <5728562B.2070408@redhat.com> From: Richard Henderson Message-ID: <73c32c0c-bb44-28bf-91d9-2227854ae0d7@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 03 May 2016 14:39:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5728562B.2070408@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2016/txt/msg00016.txt.bz2 On 05/02/2016 09:41 PM, Andrew Haley wrote: > On 02/05/16 14:51, Anthony Green wrote: >> In addition, I've granted write permission to three trusted and active >> hackers: Tom Tromey, Richard Henderson and Josh Triplett. I plan on >> spending a little more time on libffi soon, but there's been a log jam >> of PRs over the past year, and I hope this change will help move >> things along. > > We should have the conversation about what to do about the old and > stale libffi in the GCC tree. It's caused me (and probably plenty of > others) a great deal of confusion this year, with various bug fixes > and improvements to merge one way or the other. In particular, I > still don't really know where development happens: some of it happens > in GCC and some in libffi upstream. > > I'd like libffi to be gone from the GCC repo, but that's probably not > possible. I intend to delete libgcj, but I think that gccgo still > uses libffi. Indeed. But in causing gccgo to use libffi, I needed to make extensions to libffi (ffi_call_go etc). The two repos were synced at that time, modulo the configure stuff. r~