Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>, <http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
From: Chris Faylor <cgf AT cygnus DOT com>
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 19:20:13 -0400
To: cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Subject: Re: Patch for g++
Message-ID: <20000605192013.A4053@cygnus.com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
References: <200006052302 DOT QAA11584 AT cygnus DOT com> <20000605190443 DOT B1233 AT cygnus DOT com> <393C344D DOT FDEFEC15 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i
In-Reply-To: <393C344D.FDEFEC15@ece.gatech.edu>; from cwilson@ece.gatech.edu on Mon, Jun 05, 2000 at 07:14:21PM -0400

On Mon, Jun 05, 2000 at 07:14:21PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
>  I'm not sure that will do any good -- but Ron ought to do it anyway as
>'due diligence'. The GCC people don't seem to appreciate patches that
>come from outside the 'blessed few' core developers. I've had a patch in
>the queue for almost a month that has gotten NO response or comments.
>Not even, 'your patch sucks please go away' or 'I know your patch is
>only 2 lines but please fill out the copyright assignment form anyway'.
>Even DJ's patches seem to be routinely ignored.

I have (ahem) a little influence in these matters, though.  If the patch
appears in gcc-patches I have a couple of avenues that I can use for
getting the patch checked in.

Was your patch for changing the dll search order, Ron?  I must have
missed it.  I'd be happy to ping people about this, too.

The basic problem with the gcc folks (at Cygnus/Red Hat at least) is that
they are *incredibly* busy.  It's easy to rubber stamp a patch if you know
and trust the contributor.  If you don't then it gets filed into the "I'll
have to study this in detail" pile and then gets delayed until they have
free time.

Free time?

cgf

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com