This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the libffi project.
Re: Non-gcc releases
- From: Andrew Pinski <pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu>
- To: tromey at redhat dot com
- Cc: Andrew Pinski <pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu>, libffi-discuss at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 13:35:46 -0800
- Subject: Re: Non-gcc releases
- References: <email@example.com>
On Mar 25, 2004, at 11:37, Tom Tromey wrote:
Etienne and I also discussed moving libffi out of the gcc tree and
into its own repository somewhere. I'd prefer not to do this. My
impression was that Etienne could find someone to do releases and that
sort of thing, but that doing actual libffi maintenance was too much
work. One nice advantage of keeping the code in the gcc tree is that
there are many platform and ABI experts around, so we can run the
various bits of assembly code past them for approval. I think getting
this sort of review out-of-tree would be much more difficult.
Another major advantage of keeping the libffi in GCC's sources is that
people who are trying to compile GCJ do not need another library to
compile and can get the latest version with gcj. Another major
is that I can move libobjc over to be using libffi without another
for users to install.
Also I want to start using libffi for the connection between gcj and
PS. The libobjc here that I am talking about is the GNU runtime library
Objective-C. It is maintained as part of GCC just like libgcj but it
be compiled separately from GCC just like libffi.