Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 13:17:39 -0500 (EST) From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@hotjobs.com> To: Jakub Jelinek <jj@sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz> Cc: obrien@NUXI.com, core@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Need some advice about FreeBSD UltraSPARC port Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9812101313570.27793-100000@bright.fx.genx.net> In-Reply-To: <199812101753.SAA09740@sunsite.mff.cuni.cz>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 10 Dec 1998, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > > > > however i noticed that almost all the patches from the ultralinux camp > > > never made it into egcs111. I'm a bit confused at this > > > > The last time I sent diffs to the EGCS people, they wanted a statement > > turning over the diffs to the FSF, required that they be exactly > > formatted in GNU style, a ChangeLog entry, and something else I can't > > remember. > > > > The UltraLinux people may have found all that too much time/trouble at > > this point in time. > > More than half of our code is merged into egcs-current (ie. not into 1.1*), > the other half (sibling call optimization and some other optimizations) > needs some work on our part to get in. On the other side, egcs-current > features a complete SPARC backend rewrite. ok, i guess my real three questions are: Can I get away without these patches or will I be generating broken code? When you say: (ie. not into 1.1*) Do you mean, not merged into the 1.1.1-release that just came out? If the answer to the prev question is that it wasn't merged, how do you rate egcs-current on usability/correctness? thanks, -Alfred > > Cheers, > Jakub To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-sparc" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.9812101313570.27793-100000>