On Thu, Jul 05, 2007 at 09:46:27AM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > "H.J. Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > I am checking in this patch to add myself as libbid maintainer. > > Normally changes to the list of maintainers are approved by the > steering committee. I didn't see any notice about this one. I would > just like to confirm that this change was approved.
I thought libbid in gcc needed a maintainer. It was my mistake. I will remove myself. Sorry for that. > > I'm also uncertain as to just who approved the commit of > libgcc/config/libbid into mainline. When I look at the code I see http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2007-06/msg00457.html http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2007-06/msg00491.html Both x86 maintainer and build/libgcc maintainer reviewed the patch. > that it is not formatted to the GNU standard, and it includes C++ > style comments which we do not normally use in C code. This library is a general BID library developed at Intel, not just for gcc. Can we have an exception or some compromise? > > I'm also uncertain as to the relationship of the code in gcc mainline > and the code at Intel. This code was written at Intel and I see there > is now a ChangeLog entry which starts > Updated from Intel BID library: > Where can the Intel BID library sources be found? What license is it > under? What should happen with changes that we want to make to the > libbid sources now in mainline? Should we send them back to Intel? > > I see that bid_intrinsics.h has a #ifdef IN_LIBGCC2 which seems > redundant for code that is in libgcc. The beta Intel BID library was announced at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2007-04/msg00903.html which has a BSD license. The one submitted to gcc is under GPL v2 + exception. This library isn't just for libgcc. We'd like to keep libbid in gcc as close to Intel BID library as possible. I would prefer bug to be fixed in Intel BID library first if all possible. We should track gcc libbid bugs in gcc bugzilla. We can add a new libbid component and assign all libbid bugs to me. H.J.
