Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2002 19:28:33 -0700 From: Chad David <davidc@issci.ca> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Objective-C threads Message-ID: <20021124192833.A24591@newton.issci.ca> In-Reply-To: <3DE1777D.F8784C48@mindspring.com>; from tlambert2@mindspring.com on Sun, Nov 24, 2002 at 05:06:05PM -0800 References: <20021029190941.A43525@newton.issci.ca> <3DBF4C35.B554A7C1@mindspring.com> <20021029211322.B45337@newton.issci.ca> <3DBF8FD8.A68747D8@mindspring.com> <20021030101943.GB80447@dragon.nuxi.com> <20021030092353.D58476@newton.issci.ca> <3DE1777D.F8784C48@mindspring.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Nov 24, 2002 at 05:06:05PM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote: > Chad David wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 02:19:43AM -0800, David O'Brien wrote: > > > Perhaps because maintaining them in the FreeBSD repo might be the wrong > > > place. To answer your other questiion -- because a change to fix one > > > thing for one person might break things for 10 others. > > > > Which brings us back to my original question... why are ObjC threads > > disabled? I don't much care about my other patches, I just want > > to know who the 10 others are who will break if we enable threads, > > and how to fix that breakage. My minor patches were only posted because > > you asked :). > > > > I do have other patches for thr-posix, but I agree that it would be > > better if they went to gcc, and didn't get stacked locally. And I thought this thread was dead :). > > The answer is that your other patches have not been committed > to gcc, so any changes to gcc, other than configuration, would > have to be maintained in the FreeBSD repository. > > I personally have no problem with this, if it makes Objective C > work where it didn't before, and doesn't impact and other code, > or non-Objective C compilations. But I am not the maintainer, > and David O'Brien is, so it is him you have to convince, since > it is for him you are making extra work. I don't really feel a need to "convince". If people are too busy (or just do not care) to maintain ObjC within FreeBSD, then I'll just have to do it locally. Its actually less work for me to keep my patches to myself, and I'm certainly not trying to volunteer obrien for more work. We are all busy and ObjC is hardly a priority for many. > > It may seem the slow way around, but you should submit your > patches to the gcc folks first, and wait for them to be included, > such that FreeBSD will need only configuration changes. I've done that, but have not yet received any feedback. > > I have gotten literally hundreds of patches into FreeBSD by > ignoring the FreeBSD process, and submitting the patches back > to the vendor from which FreeBSD obtains the code, so this is > a success strategy. Manipulation is a life stategy :). -- Chad David davidc@issci.ca www.FreeBSD.org davidc@freebsd.org ISSci Inc. Calgary, Alberta Canada To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20021124192833.A24591>