Re: -= PROPOSAL =- Release sarge with amd64
Wouter Verhelst <wouter@grep.be> writes:
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2004 at 01:51:18AM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
>> Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> > On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 16:30:45 -0700, Adam McKenna <adam@flounder.net> said:
>> >
>> >> I agree with you. You have the right to do your job however you see
>> >> fit, as long as you are *doing your job*. If you're not doing your
>> >> job, and your excuse is that as a volunteer, nobody can force you to
>> >> do anything, then you have an attitude problem.
>> >
>> > Inaction, or ignoring, certain issues may be how I see doing
>> > my job best.
>>
>> In that case, you are simply wrong.
>
> gcc isn't able to compile everything vaguely resembling C code on this
> planet. Some people would consider it a feature to have that. Should you
> ignore that?
If someone sends in a reasonable patch for it it should certainly not
be ignored. And if the patch is unreasonable is should be stated that
it is and not being ignored.
So it should never be ignored. Even if that means adding a line to the
docs (which surely is in the gcc docs).
MfG
Goswin
Reply to: