tech-pkg archive

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

Re: wrappers and gcc -isystem

Thomas Klausner <> writes:

> On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 10:22:46AM +0000, Jonathan Perkin wrote:
>> Your patch only handles legacy wrappers, not cwrappers which is
>> necessary for fast (bulk) builds.  If you can come up with a patch
>> which handles cwrappers too (which would be required for integration
>> anyway) then I'd be happy to test it.
> As long as cwrappers is not enabled by default[1], I don't think this
> should be a requirement for patches to be accepted.
>  Thomas

I don't think that's quite the right nuance.  The question is not
exactly about default, but about which set of mechanisms we consider to
be part of the existing stable base and which therefore must not be
broken by changes, vs things that are still experimental and must cope
with other changes.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index