Re: [PATCH 2 of 2] cc/gcc: 4.4.5, add arm-softfloat-libgcc patch from buildroot

[Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar at gmail dot com>]

Hi,

On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 12:27 AM, Esben Haabendal
<eha@doredevelopment.dk> wrote:
> Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> I don't care gcc working for you or not. Beside correctness, what I do
>> care about is about all the other user of gcc not using crosstool-ng.
>
> I believe you are right here.
>
> Given that, it makes sense that you care a lot that all bugs founds is
> reported to fx. gcc bugzilla.
>
> But it does _not_ make any sense that you care about which
> possibly-broken patches are included in ct-ng, as you clearly do not
> care of all users of ct-ng.
>
> Feel free to continue raising the flag every single time a patch is
> proposed to or included in ct-ng which tries to fix an issue which has
> not been reported upstream.
>
> But _please_ do stop trying to obstruct the ct-ng work. ?It is none of
> your business.
>
You should have been a politician, you said something and its opposite
in this excerpt: comment on patches but STFU.

That said, as a former heavy user of ct-ng, I'm still using daily a
toolchain built with it, so this _make_it_ my business. Nowadays, I
think it has not been the best move I ever made, fortunately it is
only used for non critical stuff on a fairly common target. The last
thing I want to have to deal with is a bug in the toolchain. The more
I dug in ct-ng's internal, the more I found it was a placeholder of
crappy hack. Now I'm building my own toolchain, my own way, and report
to the tool maintainer. No longer that this morning I spot a bug in
the wrapper script used in the time of the shared companion libs. But
I rewrote that script, so I don't care about ct-ng version.

 - Arnaud

--
For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq