1 |
On Friday 07 July 2006 17:53, Harald van Dijk wrote: |
2 |
> On Fri, Jul 07, 2006 at 05:12:21PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
3 |
> > On Friday 07 July 2006 01:46, Harald van Dijk wrote: |
4 |
> > > On Thu, Jul 06, 2006 at 07:44:34PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
5 |
> > > > On Thursday 06 July 2006 16:14, Harald van Dijk wrote: |
6 |
> > > > > Gentoo's gcc with the vanilla flag isn't the official GCC. Most |
7 |
> > > > > patches don't get appplied, but some do. Plus, gcc[vanilla] isn't a |
8 |
> > > > > supported compiler in Gentoo. |
9 |
> > > > |
10 |
> > > > you're just griping because i forced ssp/pie regardless of |
11 |
> > > > USE=vanilla ... |
12 |
> > > |
13 |
> > > I didn't mind that you applied ssp/pie patches regardless of |
14 |
> > > USE=vanilla, I did mind that you applied the stub patches with |
15 |
> > > USE="nossp vanilla", and I also didn't like that this was either done |
16 |
> > > accidentally but ignored when pointed out, or that this was done |
17 |
> > > deliberately with a misleading cvs log message. |
18 |
> > |
19 |
> > it was not ignored, i told you the answer was no ... i listened to your |
20 |
> > request and then i evaluated the situation and deemed at the time to go |
21 |
> > with what we have now. see how your usage of "ignored" is incorrect here |
22 |
> > ? |
23 |
> |
24 |
> Actually, you did ignore. The below text refers to something older. |
25 |
|
26 |
ignored *what* then ? you requested USE=vanilla control ssp, i said no and |
27 |
i'll add support for USE=nossp ... you requested USE/stub control, i said no, |
28 |
go delete the stubs |
29 |
|
30 |
i dont see what else you're referring to ... be specific, vague claims only |
31 |
lead to wasting of both our times |
32 |
|
33 |
> > > I don't know how much gcc-spec-env.patch can be trusted, and even if it |
34 |
> > > is 100% safe, such patches don't belong in anything that would be |
35 |
> > > called "vanilla". (I have commented on that patch long before this |
36 |
> > > thread started, so don't think I'm just looking for something to |
37 |
> > > complain about now.) |
38 |
> > |
39 |
> > you never pointed that patch out to me nor did i notice it, so i dont |
40 |
> > really see how you could have expected this to be fixed already |
41 |
> |
42 |
> I didn't point that out to you, I pointed that out to another of the |
43 |
> toolchain guys. I'm not completely sure who, but I think it was |
44 |
> Halcy0n. |
45 |
|
46 |
all bets are off now then ... with Halcy0n leaving us, that leaves me as the |
47 |
only person maintaining the toolchain (there are few devs who contribute |
48 |
fixes for their ports and it helps out a ton, but that doesnt really count as |
49 |
being fully responsible for the toolchain packages). no more making |
50 |
retroactive claims when i wasnt involved ;P |
51 |
|
52 |
i trust azarah to help out, but he's been busy in real life so i havent/wont |
53 |
ask him to contribute since i know he cannot (even if he wants to) |
54 |
-mike |