[PATCH 3/3] [LLVM] [sanitizer] add conditionals for libc

[Konstantin Serebryany]

On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 8:45 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
<rep.dot.nop at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 17 April 2014 16:51:23 Konstantin Serebryany
> <konstantin.s.serebryany at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 6:27 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
>> <rep.dot.nop at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On 17 April 2014 16:07, Konstantin Serebryany
>> > <konstantin.s.serebryany at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> If you are trying to modify the libsanitizer files, please read here:
>> >> https://code.google.com/p/address-sanitizer/wiki/HowToContribute
>> >
>> > I read that, thanks. Patch 3/3 is for current compiler-rt git repo,
>> > please install it there, i do not have write access to the LLVM nor
>> > compiler-rt trees.
>>
>> I can commit your patch to llvm tree only after you follow the process
>> described on that page.
>> Sorry, this is a hard rule.
>
>
> What part of the process do you think I did not follow?
>
> I made a patch for compiler-rt, sent it to llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu then
> provided the corresponding GCC parts, along a backport of the new bits that
> I expect to be overwritten once you do a new merge, leaving just the GCC
> configuy bits. This is how I read the wiki page you cite.
>
> Please tell me what you expect me to do differently?

First, I did not notice that you've sent it to llvm-commits because it
was also sent to the gcc list (unusual thing to happen)
and got filtered into the gcc part of my mail. Sorry.
But second, the patch is far from trivial and you should not expect us
to commit it w/o a careful review,
so here comes another part of the wiki: "For non-trivial patches
please use Phabricator -- this will help us reply faster."

--kcc


>
> Thanks,
>>
>>
>> --kcc
>
>
>
> Sent with AquaMail for Android
> http://www.aqua-mail.com
>
>