incubator-stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefan Teleman <stefan.tele...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: STDCXX-1066 [was: Re: STDCXX forks]
Date Mon, 24 Sep 2012 12:46:04 GMT
On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 8:21 AM, Liviu Nicoara <nikkoara@hates.ms> wrote:

> In the light of your inability to answer the simplest questions about the
> correctness and usefulness of this patch, I propose we strike the patch in
> its entirety.

Let me make something very clear to you: what I am doing here is a
courtesy to the stdcxx project. There is no requirement in my job
description to waste hours arguing with you in pointless squabbles
over email. Nor is there a requirement in the APL V2.0 which would
somehow compel us to redistribute our source code changes.

 > We could and should re-work the instances in the library where
> we might use mutex and condition objects that are misaligned wrt the
> mentioned kernel update.

Yeah, why don't you go ahead and do that. Just like you fixed stdcxx-1056.

--Stefan

-- 
Stefan Teleman
KDE e.V.
stefan.teleman@gmail.com

Mime
View raw message