Re: [Mspgcc-users] mailing list administrivia
Thanks for the responses. (1) has been implemented. Unsubscribed posters will promptly get a response saying: mspgcc-users does not accept postings from non-members. Please resubmit your post after subscribing at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mspgcc-users If you think that your messages are being rejected in error, contact the mailing list owner at mspgcc-users-ow...@lists.sourceforge.net. If you wish to file a bug report, please enter a ticket at: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=42303atid=432701 I hope that will be a good compromise. The user whose Boxbe account provoked (2) has not resubscribed AFAIK, though I did try to forward this to him/her in explanation. Signatures attached using application/pgp-signature should now pass. I'm afraid to make more significant changes to the content filters since what's there now seems to mostly work. The list's reply-to behavior was also raised. Until now, the Reply-To has rewritten to appear to come from the list, so that all responses go to the list. This improves the visibility of discussions by avoiding loss of answers that others might find interesting. However, it makes it fairly difficult (at least using gmail) to respond directly to the poster: one must hand-copy the sender's address. As of this message, I'm trying the alternative: direct replies should go to the poster, while group reply (reply-all) should go to both. This is the default and recommended behavior for mailman lists. We may lose a little public discussion until people get used to this, but I do want to give it a try. If you have strong preferences for the existing behavior, speak up. (Using group-reply, of course.) We now return you to your regularly scheduled bug reports. Peter On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 11:35 AM, Peter Bigot p...@peoplepowerco.com wrote: Two points: 1) I propose to change the list management so that email to it from people who are not subscribed is immediately bounced (saying that the list requires subscription for posting), rather than put into a pending bucket where Chris or I have to look at it. If it's worth our time to read, it's worth the sender's time to subscribe so they can see responses. 2) Anybody who subscribes from an address that implements a screening filter like Boxbe so that mail to the list results in a request to add yourself to the recipient's Guest List will be summarily unsubscribed. Maybe I'll send an email saying why. I won't bother to add myself to your guest list to tell you that it's happened. Manage your spam without inconveniencing me, thank you very much. Comments on either of these? Peter -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today http://p.sf.net/sfu/msIE9-sfdev2dev___ Mspgcc-users mailing list Mspgcc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mspgcc-users
[Mspgcc-users] Right way to contribute patches to msp430-libc?
Hello, What's the right way to contribute patches to msp430-libc-ti_20101114, the version that mspgcc4's build script builds by default? For now, I've modified mspgcc4/do-libc.sh to optionally apply a patch after downloading the libc tarball from SourceForge, but I'd like to submit my changes as far upstream as possible. FWIW, the msp430-libc patch I'd like to contribute makes the header files compatible with LLVM+clang, which now has a workable MSP430 backend. The most significant change gives address-pinned globals like P1IN external linkage so that they don't get emitted as common symbols. AFAICT mspgcc is violating the C standard by *not* emitting them as common symbols now, given the way they're declared. -ben -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today http://p.sf.net/sfu/msIE9-sfdev2dev ___ Mspgcc-users mailing list Mspgcc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mspgcc-users
Re: [Mspgcc-users] Right way to contribute patches to msp430-libc?
Create a Bugs tracker ticket on the mspgcc4 sourceforge project and attach your patch to that. If the changes are to the headers themselves, I may have to push them upstream to TI. Peter On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 2:57 PM, Ben Ransford ransf...@cs.umass.edu wrote: Hello, What's the right way to contribute patches to msp430-libc-ti_20101114, the version that mspgcc4's build script builds by default? For now, I've modified mspgcc4/do-libc.sh to optionally apply a patch after downloading the libc tarball from SourceForge, but I'd like to submit my changes as far upstream as possible. FWIW, the msp430-libc patch I'd like to contribute makes the header files compatible with LLVM+clang, which now has a workable MSP430 backend. The most significant change gives address-pinned globals like P1IN external linkage so that they don't get emitted as common symbols. AFAICT mspgcc is violating the C standard by *not* emitting them as common symbols now, given the way they're declared. -ben -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today http://p.sf.net/sfu/msIE9-sfdev2dev ___ Mspgcc-users mailing list Mspgcc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mspgcc-users -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today http://p.sf.net/sfu/msIE9-sfdev2dev___ Mspgcc-users mailing list Mspgcc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mspgcc-users
[Mspgcc-users] __no_init equivalent?
I'm porting some TI example code which uses the __no_init keyword, and I'm having trouble figuring out whether there's an equivalent for it in GCC, and/or if it's something I can simply ignore/omit. Assuming that I correctly understand what __no_init does in IAR, will GCC automagically do the right thing for any global variables without initializers? -- Mark J. Blair, NF6X n...@nf6x.net Web page: http://www.nf6x.net/ GnuPG public key available from my web page. -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today http://p.sf.net/sfu/msIE9-sfdev2dev ___ Mspgcc-users mailing list Mspgcc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mspgcc-users
