croostool-ng: GCC 4.4.1 Working!

Yann E. MORIN yann.morin.1998@anciens.enib.fr
Mon Sep 28 17:30:00 GMT 2009


Joachim,
All,

On Monday 28 September 2009 15:40:40 Joachim Nilsson wrote:
> On 09/26/2009 10:19 PM, Yann E. MORIN wrote:
> > Yes, sorry... I have been a bit lazy the past few days (weeks) wrt
> > crosstool-NG... It's been threee years now I'm working on it, and
> > I feel a little bit blasé.
> Sorry to hear that,

I am not planning on abandonning crosstool-NG at all. I just wanted to say
that it has been taking a lot of my time, it is in quite a good shape,
I personnaly have no strong and big improvements I *need*, so development
has slowed down. But I *will* *continue* to maintain and enhance it.

> we are a lot of people who really appreciate your work!

Thanks! :-) Having such feedback is part of the motivation to continue!

> With your recent move to hg it could perhaps be easier to share  
> the burden, so to speak?

Yes, that was part of the plan. Submitting patches should be easier, now.
With correctly formatted patches (eg. sent with the patchbomb extension
to Hg, 'hg email'), it's very simple for me to apply and merge patches.

> Are there anyone else out there willing to help Yann?

In fact, the help I am most in need of is from people with needs I do not
have: canadian, newlib, cygwin target, etc... so they push features and
fixes to features I don't use and corner cases I don't hit.

> I'm still learning, but I could at least start by reading up on hg and 
> clone your tree. (I am a bit of a bzr and git man myself though, so I've 
> been lazy...)

Well, I found Hg to be easier to learn than Git. I never seemed to understand
Git, while switching to Hg was quite straitghforward.

> Maybe the best way for you would be if we set up a better patch approval 
> process?  When a new patch is suggested (like mine), some other people 
> start evaluating it and give it ++ or --, and if enough people approve 
> your job is simply to pull it in?  Not too unlike how Linus does it...

That's a good idea, indeed. We could setup the following process:
- post patch to crosgcc@sourceware... + cc: me
- give a week (or so) for people to comment and rate with '+1' or '-1'
  (-1 requiring a comment).
- after a week, require a majority of 2/3 to apply the patch:
  - if total_ratings < minimum, drop the patch, possibly with comments
  - else if ( positive_ratings / total_ratings ) > (2/3), then apply the patch
  - else, drop the patch, possibly with comments

(minimum is to be tweaked for this list: 10 may be just too many, while
3 may be not enough).

I also receive patches directly, and for those patch I'd answer with smthg
along the lines of:
  Please resend to crossgcc@... and cc me, or your
  patch will be dropped without furher notice.

Do you guys find this approach to be sane?

> > I'm a bit reluctant at applying your patch: there are currently 25 patches
> > applied to gcc-4.4.0, and I find it odd that 4.4.1 only requires 5.
> > I will try to forward-port the gcc-4.4.0 patchset up to 4.4.1.
> I see, I was a bit surprised myself when I started looking at how the 
> buildroot guys had done it.  I, perhaps wrongly, assumed they had 
> already checked if existing patches had been applied upstream.

I have it in a local clone, and it seems to work for my use-case.
I will push later tonight.

> > And to answer your question, the README has a quick step-by-step example
> > on how to submit patches. It boils down to using Mercurial's patchbomb
> > extension.
> Thanks, you're always too kind!  A simple RTFM would have been 
> appropriate in this case. ;-)

Bah, the manual is not so fine! ;-)

Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.

-- 
.-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------.
|  Yann E. MORIN  | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: |
| +0/33 662376056 | Software  Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN     |  ___               |
| --==< ^_^ >==-- `------------.-------:  X  AGAINST      |  \e/  There is no  |
| http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL    |   v   conspiracy.  |
`------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'



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



More information about the crossgcc mailing list