Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2002 09:59:13 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org> To: Joe Kelsey <joe@zircon.seattle.wa.us> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: gcc3.x issues Message-ID: <20020212021140.BADA29F26A@okeeffe.bestweb.net>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Joe Kelsey <joe@zircon.seattle.wa.us> [020207 09:36] wrote: > David O'Brien writes: > > On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 05:47:07PM -0800, Joe Kelsey wrote: > > > What is so hard about allowing someone to specify the list of frontends > > > to provide at system build time? I thought that gcc was supposed to be > > > a modular compiler system, and that all we are asking for is the ability > > > to add to the default front ends, along with the default support > > > libraries, in the default places. > > > > Uh Joe... WhereTF is your patch to do this? > > My or your MTA seems to have deleted it. > > This is the atypical, smug, "I'm a committer and your're not" attitude > that permeates so much of the upper echelons of the FreeBSD team. It > really makes me sick that people seem to prefer to throw out useless > comments like this instead of giving actual answers to valide questions. These comments are not useless, most committers have day jobs that unfortunetly preclude them from having time to work on every little feature request. Furthermore asking for patches is the exact opposite of being smug at least in the way of flaunting one's commit priveledges, it's providing the user an opportunity to present work for inclusion into the project. > I believe that Terry has already pointed out several of the places in > the Makefile system that prevent anyone from reinstalling gcc over the > top of the standard one. His comments were helpful and succinct. > David's comments are unhelpful and terse. Quite a difference in > attitude. And you wonder why it is so hard to get new volunteers. We have plenty of volunteers willing to point out problems, what would be even more helpful is people _submitting the fixes_ to these problems. Not like problem reporting isn't important, but you can't fault David not being willing to take the time to implement a feature he doesn't find all that important. In fact you should be happy that he'd be willing to review and commit code when it does appear. > David has made it quite clear to me in the past that he is absolutely > not interested in anyone else ever touching the gcc port in the base > system. I have no desire to do anything when faced with such an > attitude. Actually David routinely requests assistance and would like to offload some if not all of the gcc maintainance, the problem he's having is finding people capable and willing to do the work rather than people that just want to draft emails complaining about his current work. > This is a discussion of general principles. After settling the debate, > *then* it is appropriate to ask if anyone would like to work on the > issues. Then, I may or may not try to generate patches. Personally I don't have time to engage in a debate, and I doubt that David does either. By stating that he would consider patches he's already given you the go-ahead to do the work, if it's up to par with the project's guidlines there should be minimal fuss with integration. > Thanks for your helpful and pleasant comments David. Yeah, whatever, don't we all feel better now? :) -- -Alfred Perlstein [alfred@freebsd.org] 'Instead of asking why a piece of software is using "1970s technology," start asking why software is ignoring 30 years of accumulated wisdom.' Tax deductible donations for FreeBSD: http://www.freebsdfoundation.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message 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?20020212021140.BADA29F26A>