Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date:	Mon, 20 Nov 2000 20:23:56 -0800
From:	Richard Henderson <rth AT redhat DOT com>
To:	DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
Cc:	zackw AT Stanford DOT EDU, Kelley DOT Cook AT home DOT com, Cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com,
	gcc-bugs AT gcc DOT gnu DOT org, gcc-patches AT gcc DOT gnu DOT org
Subject:	Re: Reason for cygwin GCC 2.97 non-bootstrap found
Message-ID:	<20001120202356.A17461@redhat.com>
References:	<200011202245 DOT eAKMjjN27680 AT plmlir3 DOT mail DOT eds DOT com> <20001120154222 DOT O17712 AT wolery DOT stanford DOT edu> <20001120192414 DOT D17317 AT redhat DOT com> <20001120193449 DOT Y17712 AT wolery DOT stanford DOT edu> <20001120194446 DOT A17399 AT redhat DOT com> <200011210401 DOT XAA10968 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
Mime-Version:	1.0
X-Mailer:	Mutt 0.95.5i
In-Reply-To:	<200011210401.XAA10968@envy.delorie.com>; from DJ Delorie on Mon, Nov 20, 2000 at 11:01:30PM -0500

On Mon, Nov 20, 2000 at 11:01:30PM -0500, DJ Delorie wrote:
> > IMO there's no pressing reason to do _any_ of it in libiberty,
> 
> The original patches included an implementation of valloc() in
> libiberty, for systems that didn't have one, so that ggc could rely on
> a working valloc.

The point being?  There's _still_ no reason it _must_ be done
in libiberty.


r~

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com

- Raw text -