On 12/21/2008 3:20 AM, Carmelo Amoroso wrote: > Rob Landley wrote: > >> On Saturday 20 December 2008 02:37:04 Carmelo Amoroso wrote: >> >>> Khem, Bernhard >>> IMO the effort required for merging new stuff (not bug but basically >>> cleanup, warning and so on) from trunk to nptl branch, is becoming >>> to huge, and it is not helping us into having a working NPTL branch >>> getting benefits from this. Guys are putting new changes into trunk >>> faster than me. >>> >>> Indeed we had a lot of problems in the nptl branch due to changes >>> in signal handling for example (there are still few files that I did >>> not merge because they caused nptl branch stopping to work). >>> >>> At this stage my proposal is to start *now* putting TLS/futexes/NPTL code >>> into the trunk. >>> >> I believe I've been saying this for 3 years now. >> >> Please, please, please merge into trunk. The code doesn't _matter_ until >> you >> do. The number of people who have ever tested this branch in its entire >> history is probably a single digit number. >> > > ok, but just fyi there are real STB products of ST customers > that have uclibc-nptl for sh4... so it is really running. >
And we at Tilera are shipping code off of Carmelo's branch as well. Obviously we'd be even happier to be shipping code that was off the trunk :-) -- Chris Metcalf, Tilera Corp. http://www.tilera.com _______________________________________________ uClibc mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/uclibc
