tinycc-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Tinycc-devel] Allow configuration of tcc libraries search path


From: Kirill Smelkov
Subject: Re: [Tinycc-devel] Allow configuration of tcc libraries search path
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2011 19:25:14 +0400
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)

Grischka, Rob, All,

On Sat, Jul 09, 2011 at 09:28:21PM +0200, grischka wrote:
> Rob Landley wrote:
>> On 07/07/2011 01:22 PM, grischka wrote:
>>> Anyway.  As to the general issue with search paths, it would be good
>>> to find something clearer and more flexible.
>>
>> A quick check finds:
>>
>> http://landley.net/hg/tinycc/rev/f304c7e3de8d
>> http://landley.net/hg/tinycc/rev/374af493d0ac
>> http://landley.net/hg/tinycc/rev/647f1a3feb8b
>> http://landley.net/hg/tinycc/rev/22b60bb22c83
>> http://landley.net/hg/tinycc/rev/c42c2145d359
>> http://landley.net/hg/tinycc/rev/a283eb90c0f7
>>
>> And so on, and so forth...  To be honest, it's been almost 4 years, I'd
>> have to go back and look up the details again.
>
> Thanks for the commit links.
>
> I have it as git branch btw. If anyone is interested I could push
> it on repo.or.cz.

Yes, I'm interested. Could you please do so? Thanks.


On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 07:56:57PM +0200, Ivo van Poorten wrote:
> On Saturday 09 July 2011, 21:28:21, grischka wrote:
> > Rob Landley wrote:
> > > http://landley.net/hg/tinycc/rev/f304c7e3de8d
> > > http://landley.net/hg/tinycc/rev/374af493d0ac
> > > http://landley.net/hg/tinycc/rev/647f1a3feb8b
> > > http://landley.net/hg/tinycc/rev/22b60bb22c83
> > > http://landley.net/hg/tinycc/rev/c42c2145d359
> > > http://landley.net/hg/tinycc/rev/a283eb90c0f7
> > ...
> > 
> > Thanks for the commit links.
> > 
> > I have it as git branch btw. If anyone is interested I could push
> > it on repo.or.cz.
> 
> Be aware that Rob changed the license of his fork to GPL and hence is not 
> compatible with the LGPL that tcc is under.
> 
> --Ivo


On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 01:00:21PM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
> On 07/09/2011 02:28 PM, grischka wrote:
> > Rob Landley wrote:
> >> On 07/07/2011 01:22 PM, grischka wrote:
> >>> Anyway.  As to the general issue with search paths, it would be good
> >>> to find something clearer and more flexible.
> >>
> >> A quick check finds:
> >>
> >> http://landley.net/hg/tinycc/rev/f304c7e3de8d
> >> http://landley.net/hg/tinycc/rev/374af493d0ac
> >> http://landley.net/hg/tinycc/rev/647f1a3feb8b
> >> http://landley.net/hg/tinycc/rev/22b60bb22c83
> >> http://landley.net/hg/tinycc/rev/c42c2145d359
> >> http://landley.net/hg/tinycc/rev/a283eb90c0f7
> >>
> >> And so on, and so forth...  To be honest, it's been almost 4 years, I'd
> >> have to go back and look up the details again.
> > 
> > Thanks for the commit links.
> > 
> > I have it as git branch btw. If anyone is interested I could push
> > it on repo.or.cz.
> 
> I thought your current maintainer policy was zero editorial control,
> just let random strangers form a slush pile in the mob branch and then
> ship it?  (I can't say I've been reading the list very closely.)
> 
> It's a little disheartening to see issues I fixed over three years ago
> come up over and over again.  If I recall, you refused to port things
> you either "didn't understand" or didn't see a need for (such as
> refactoring the code so it wasn't one big tcc.c without even a tcc.h)
> from my tree the last time I gave up and waited for you guys to just
> stop it.
> 
> I put a lot of work into my version, but Fabrice wouldn't hand it the
> project to anybody who wanted to move the code out of the gnu.org CVS
> repository, and Linux Weekly News covered releases that went up on
> tinycc.org, even back when the bulk of the changes in them ported from
> my version.  I wouldn't mind so much if you didn't REFUSE TO TAKE
> OBVIOUS THINGS that you're now finding a need for all these years later.
> 
> Sigh.  I'm going to go back to ignoring this list now.  I should go
> catch up on the pcc and llvm lists...
> 
> Rob


Rob, thanks for the links and for sharing. Are you in principle ok to
relicense your changes back from GPL to LGPL so that they could be
included one way or another into tcc?

For us, tinycc users, it's a pity to see this issue being stagnated over
and over again. The CVS is de-facto gone - if it was it, now there is no
point to block your changes being merged!

Sometimes people need time to de-cvs'ify themselves and adopt good
distributed vcs practices.  I agree about somewhat funny current mob
rules, but it would be a very pity again if that would be a blocker for
cooperation.


Thanks and Peace,
Kirill



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]