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

[patch] newlib long long printf for rtems




Nick Clifton wrote:
> 
> Hi Aaron,
> 
> : I asked Joel Sherrill about it on the rtems-users list:
> :
> : > is there any reason why newlib doesn't enable long long support in
> : > printf for RTEMS?
> :
> : to which Joel replied:
> :
> : > Very simple, it was overlooked and no one noticed until now. :)
> : >
> : > Submit a patch.
> :
> : so I did.
> 
> Fair enough - I was just asking.  I am not the official maintainer for
> newlib (that would be Jeff Johnston <jjohnstn at redhat.com>) but I ran
> across this same problem for a different toolchain so I was interested
> to know if there were any expected problems.
> 
> : for future reference, should all rtems-specific patches be sent
> : through Joel?
> 
> Sorry I do not know.  My guess would be that having them discussed on
> the rtems-users list would be the right thing to do first, and once
> they are ready submitting them to the appropriate mailing list
> (newlib at sources.redhat.com in this particular case).

In the past, nearly all patches from the RTEMS community have filtered
through me first.  This lets them get into the official RTEMS patches
and get some use before moving on.  At the moment, the newlib and
binutils CVS have no known RTEMS issues and gcc has most of the
RTEMS patches merged.  I submitted some that are not in yet AFAIK.

I like it this way but must admit that it puts burden on me in
the case where the patch is significant and I have slowed the
process unnecessarily in the past.  In particular, the gdb
patch is too large and needs to be cleared up.

THe RTEMS GDB patches require some paperwork from a couple of 
people before they can be submitted.

> Cheers
>         Nick

-- 
Joel Sherrill, Ph.D.             Director of Research & Development
joel at OARcorp.com                 On-Line Applications Research
Ask me about RTEMS: a free RTOS  Huntsville AL 35805
   Support Available             (256) 722-9985