On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 12:40 PM, Joel Sherrill <joel.sherr...@oarcorp.com> wrote: > On 03/30/2010 05:14 AM, Richard Guenther wrote: >> >> On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 10:47 AM, Samuel Tardieu<s...@rfc1149.net> wrote: >> >>> >>> Hi. >>> >>> GCC 4.5.0 will ship with support for lm32. This is an IP which can be >>> configured in several ways (with or without barrel shifter, and with or >>> without a hardware multiplier). >>> >>> To be usable in all cases, it has to support multilib. The support is >>> present but broken: the "MULTILIB_OPTIONS" variable is located in the >>> wrong file! >>> >>> I submitted a small patch from a colleague of mine >>> (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-03/msg00307.html) and sent three >>> PING already. But since there is no listed maintainer for lm32, it seems >>> that it doesn't draw any attention from anyone who can approve it, so I >>> cannot check it in. >>> >>> If we do not apply it, the multilib option for this new target will be >>> broken in 4.5.0. I know we are late in the development stage, but lm32 >>> is a new target and reading the patch makes it clear that it cannot >>> break any other platform. >>> >>> I know you guys are all very busy but I am not able to reach anyone >>> interested in lm32 on gcc-patches. Could someone with global commit >>> rights have a look at this patch and approve/reject/delay it? >>> >>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-03/msg00307.html >>> >> >> The patch is ok. >> >> I wonder why we even accepted a new port without a maintainer though. >> David? >> >> > > I thought Jon Beniston was maintainer of this. He may not > have listed himself.
The SC didn't appoint a maintainer for lm32 as far as I can see. Richard.
