On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 5:46 PM Joseph Myers wrote:
>
> On Wed, 27 Nov 2019, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
>
> > Joseph Myers :
> > > One more observation on that: in my last test conversion, deleting the
> > > emptycommit-* tags took over 7 hours (i.e. the bulk of the time for the
> > > conversion was s
Hi
Hope you are doing well.
We are following up to if you would be interested in the Attendees/Visitors
List of
The Trophex Show
12 - 13 Jan 2020
NEC, Birmingham, UK
Counts = 7,640
our company provides the following details regarding your attendees: Title,
Client Name, Email and Website, addres
libsanitizer on trunk only bumps the soversion for asan, but the other libraries
drop some symbols without bumping the soname, Are these changes intended, and
should the soversions be bumped?
Matthias
diff --git a/debian/liblsan0.symbols b/debian/liblsan0.symbols
index f318d9a..5aa23a6 100644
--
On 11/29/19 12:28 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
libsanitizer on trunk only bumps the soversion for asan, but the other libraries
drop some symbols without bumping the soname, Are these changes intended, and
should the soversions be bumped?
Hello.
Yes, it's intended. We should bump the library only
On Fri, Nov 29, 2019 at 12:28:51PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> libsanitizer on trunk only bumps the soversion for asan, but the other
> libraries
> drop some symbols without bumping the soname, Are these changes intended, and
> should the soversions be bumped?
libsanitizer libs have upstream t
On 11/29/19 12:47 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
__ubsan_handle_function_type_mismatch* is something we don't use (Martin,
should we add such sanitizer? We have gimple_call_fntype vs. actual decl
types, but it would need some inspection on what the sanitizer really does),
but still e.g. clang compiled
On Fri, 29 Nov 2019, Richard Biener wrote:
> Can't branches and tags be deleted after the conversion as well?
Yes (manually on the server, depending on the exact configuration we set
up for what pushes are allowed), but deleting before conversion speeds up
the process of verifying conversion co
On 29/11/2019 16:14, Joseph Myers wrote:
# Tags for vendor releases.
tag/ARM/ delete
tag/apple/gcc/ delete
tag/csl/ delete
tag /linaro-/ delete
tag /microblaze-/ delete
tag/st/GCC/ delete
tag /ubuntu/gcc-/ delete
tag egcs_1_0_x_redhat5_1 delete
tag gcc-1766 delete
tag gcc-3_2-rhl8-3_2-7 delet
On Fri, 29 Nov 2019, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> I'm not convinced these should be just deleted. At least, not without the
> specific vendor's agreement. But perhaps they should not be in the default
> refs/tags namespace.
What about the other tags I listed? Can we get agreement on delet
Hello,
my name is Erick and I am working in a link-time-optimization pass named
ipa-initcall-cp. It is called ipa-initcall-cp because it propagates constant
values written to variables with static lifetimes (such as ones initialized in
initialization functions). ipa-initcall-cp has to be located
On Fri, Nov 29, 2019 at 04:57:30PM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Nov 2019, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
>
> > I'm not convinced these should be just deleted. At least, not without the
> > specific vendor's agreement. But perhaps they should not be in the default
> > refs/tags namesp
On Fri, 29 Nov 2019, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 29, 2019 at 04:57:30PM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> > On Fri, 29 Nov 2019, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> >
> > > I'm not convinced these should be just deleted. At least, not without the
> > > specific vendor's agreement. But perh
Snapshot gcc-8-20191129 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/8-20191129/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 8 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches/gcc-8
On Wed, 27 Nov 2019, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> Joseph Myers :
> > > I'm more worried about missing files. I saw a bunch of those on my
> > > last test. This could be spurious - the elaborate set of branch
> > > mappings you specified confuses my validation test, because there is
> > > no longer a
Dear Sir / Madam
We are
Importers & Stockiest of Pure TITANIUM and TITANIUM ALLOYS.
We stock Titanium Grade II and V in form of Strips, Rods, Plates, Wires,
Baskets, Components, etc
Other ASTM & GOST grades can be arranged on request!
Please
revert bank to us with your requirements.
With R
Dear Sir / Madam
We are
Importers & Stockiest of Pure TITANIUM and TITANIUM ALLOYS.
We stock Titanium Grade II and V in form of Strips, Rods, Plates, Wires,
Baskets, Components, etc
Other ASTM & GOST grades can be arranged on request!
Please
revert bank to us with your requirements.
With R
16 matches
Mail list logo
