On Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 05:41:48PM -0600, Matthew Burgess wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Apr 2011 19:29:48 -0400, Jeremy Huntwork
> wrote:
> > On Apr 6, 2011, at 6:14 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:
> >
> >> From my viewpoint (minimalist, extra packages which aren't
> >> mandatory need to be justified), the lack of
On Wed, 6 Apr 2011 19:29:48 -0400, Jeremy Huntwork
wrote:
> On Apr 6, 2011, at 6:14 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:
>
>> From my viewpoint (minimalist, extra packages which aren't
>> mandatory need to be justified), the lack of applications (that I
>> know of, maybe there is now something) which detect a
On Apr 6, 2011, at 6:14 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:
> From my viewpoint (minimalist, extra packages which aren't
> mandatory need to be justified), the lack of applications (that I
> know of, maybe there is now something) which detect and use
> Cloog-whichever was the problem.
The number of applicatio
On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 06:31:11PM -0500, DJ Lucas wrote:
> With GCC-4.6.0, any renewed interest in Graphite by those who know more
> than I? The Cloog-PPL fork is now Cloog-Pharma upstream, though I
> haven't introduced it into a local build yet and haven't checked to see
> if the license issue
With GCC-4.6.0, any renewed interest in Graphite by those who know more
than I? The Cloog-PPL fork is now Cloog-Pharma upstream, though I
haven't introduced it into a local build yet and haven't checked to see
if the license issue is fixed with the upstream version (that is why
Cloog-PPL was cr
