Ben Elliston b...@air.net.au writes:
On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 12:12:14PM -0800, Bruce Korb wrote:
If you update a chapter, the book copyright date is updated. Makes more
sense
to me.
OK. That's fine with me, then.
Thanks, I installed the patch and added libdecnumber to the list
of default
Ian Lance Taylor i...@google.com writes:
On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 2:19 AM, Richard Sandiford
rdsandif...@googlemail.com wrote:
Not exactly the most exciting patches, and certainly not worth more than
one ping, but:
libgcc copyright
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-01/msg00642.html
On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 06:59:38PM +, Richard Sandiford wrote:
These days the guideline encourage updating all files, even ones
that haven't changed, so I was hoping we could do that gcc-wide.
If that is what the guidelines say, then I will not object. I am just
a bit surprised that you
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Ben Elliston b...@air.net.au wrote:
On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 06:59:38PM +, Richard Sandiford wrote:
These days the guideline encourage updating all files, even ones
that haven't changed, so I was hoping we could do that gcc-wide.
If that is what the
On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 12:12:14PM -0800, Bruce Korb wrote:
If you update a chapter, the book copyright date is updated. Makes more sense
to me.
OK. That's fine with me, then.
Cheers, Ben
--
These man-made problems have man-made solutions. Unfortunately, the
men and women needed to solve
Not exactly the most exciting patches, and certainly not worth more than
one ping, but:
fixincludes copyright
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-01/msg00442.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-01/msg00443.html
libgcc copyright
On 02/03/13 02:19, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Not exactly the most exciting patches, and certainly not worth more than
one ping, but:
fixincludes copyright
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-01/msg00442.html
You missed the file header. Why bother with dual update issues?
---
Bruce Korb bk...@gnu.org writes:
On 02/03/13 02:19, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Not exactly the most exciting patches, and certainly not worth more than
one ping, but:
fixincludes copyright
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-01/msg00442.html
You missed the file header.
That was
On 02/03/13 09:42, Richard Sandiford wrote:
You missed the file header.
That was deliberately in patch 2 though.
OK.
Why bother with dual update issues?
Well, the point is that patch 2 is scripted.
OK:
echo $copyright | sed 's/(C) 2002-/(C) /'
and now you print the right date and
On Sun, Feb 03, 2013 at 10:19:47AM +, Richard Sandiford wrote:
libdecnumber copyright
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-01/msg00647.html
I've refreshed my memory on the use of year ranges in the copyright
notice (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-howto.html). Looking at the
On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 2:19 AM, Richard Sandiford
rdsandif...@googlemail.com wrote:
Not exactly the most exciting patches, and certainly not worth more than
one ping, but:
libgcc copyright
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-01/msg00642.html
This is OK.
Thanks.
Don't these count as
11 matches
Mail list logo
