From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1IQOGF-0002v4-2U
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 29 Aug 2007 10:11:11 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1IQOGE-0002ur-EK
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 29 Aug 2007 10:11:10 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IQOGE-0002uo-B5
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 29 Aug 2007 10:11:10 -0400
Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20])
	by monty-python.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>) id 1IQOGD-0002nA-Kt
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 29 Aug 2007 10:11:09 -0400
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 15:11:06 +0100 (BST)
From: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [patch] make qemu work with GCC 4
In-Reply-To: <46D57BB5.5000302@softhome.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0708291508190.28586@racer.site>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0708282124590.23011@wotan.suse.de>
	<8AEA1D4C-F488-43F2-B350-D62C3C4C1FD9@web.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0708291220010.23011@wotan.suse.de>
	<49F27907-6C55-40D8-A6FF-7769156F8E74@web.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0708291524560.23011@wotan.suse.de>
	<46D57BB5.5000302@softhome.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Mulyadi Santosa <a_mulyadi@softhome.net>
Cc: matz@suse.de, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Hi,

On Wed, 29 Aug 2007, Mulyadi Santosa wrote:

> Thanks for your effor Michael! Now, I only hope, one of the patches that
> makes qemu gcc4 compliant are soon merged.

Well, to throw a spanner in the works: this patch is the 4th patch along 
the lines that I came about.  None of them (AFAICT) was tested well enough 
to be included in CVS.  Indeed, the biggest problem seems to be to make a 
patch that not only works on the machine of the poster, but on other 
machines, too.

> Or, is there any plan to merge qops?

I was pretty enthusiastic about qops a while ago.  But then I saw that 
they hurt performance.  And performance is the primary reason I use QEmu, 
so I am not at all convinced that this is the way to go.  Even if parts 
have been merged already.

Ciao,
Dscho