On 07/03/2013 21:00, Andrew Haley wrote:
> Either Anthony or I review libffi patches in gcc.
Perhaps you two should list yourselves as such in MAINTAINERS, for the
avoidance of doubt?
> You're not going to get any more reviews.
I committed it. Thanks for the clarification.
cheers,
On 03/07/2013 08:23 PM, Dave Korn wrote:
> On 07/03/2013 16:55, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> On 03/07/2013 02:09 PM, Dave Korn wrote:
>>> On 06/03/2013 16:05, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>>
If no new P1 appears within a week,
>>> I may be about to file one. What priority would "Java doesn't compile on
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 08:23:20PM +, Dave Korn wrote:
> On 07/03/2013 16:55, Andrew Haley wrote:
> > On 03/07/2013 02:09 PM, Dave Korn wrote:
> >> On 06/03/2013 16:05, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >>
> >>> If no new P1 appears within a week,
> >> I may be about to file one. What priority would "
On 07/03/2013 16:55, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 03/07/2013 02:09 PM, Dave Korn wrote:
>> On 06/03/2013 16:05, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>
>>> If no new P1 appears within a week,
>> I may be about to file one. What priority would "Java doesn't compile on a
>> secondary platform" count as? There's a t
On 03/07/2013 02:09 PM, Dave Korn wrote:
> On 06/03/2013 16:05, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
>> If no new P1 appears within a week,
>
> I may be about to file one. What priority would "Java doesn't compile on a
> secondary platform" count as? There's a trivial bug in libffi and I already
> posted
On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 9:09 AM, Dave Korn wrote:
> On 06/03/2013 16:05, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
>> If no new P1 appears within a week,
>
> I may be about to file one. What priority would "Java doesn't compile on a
> secondary platform" count as? There's a trivial bug in libffi and I already
> p
On 06/03/2013 16:05, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> If no new P1 appears within a week,
I may be about to file one. What priority would "Java doesn't compile on a
secondary platform" count as? There's a trivial bug in libffi and I already
posted a patch(*) to both -patches and upstream, but am waiti
