Re: Linux vs. libio

[Jeffrey A Law <law at cygnus dot com>]

  In message <m24sddz7ak.fsf@magnus.bothner.com>you write:
  > I haven't suggested that.  What I said is that no changes should be
  > checked into areas of the gcc cvs tree that we don't own (such as
  > texinfo and any libc parts of libio) unless either (a) it has first
  > been checked into the "upstream" master source tree,
That is, in effect, what I already stated.  Thus my stand that the libc
folks have to be intimately involved in this decision.  It is not a
decision that GCC folks should make on their own.

  >  or (b) is marked
  > very clearly as a local/temporary kludge.
This is the kind of stuff that belongs in a local tree, not the GCC sources.


[ ... ]

  > This is similar to the policy Cygnus has (had) for gcc: Nothing should
  > be in the Cygnus internal cvs tree unless it is also in the external
  > tree, or marked with special markers in the code.
Correct.  Note that Cygnus doesn't tend to push those local/temporary 
kludges into the official GCC sources, nor should anyone else.  Those
kludges are kept as local changes.


jeff