Mail Archives: cygwin/2001/03/20/09:51:39
I'm sorry, I didn't mean to imply that you had any authority to get
those patches accepted. I was contrasting the gcc-2.95.3 stance of no
current cygwin support, and the 3.0 stance of accepting David's patches
when they were perhaps important to other OS.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Faylor" <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2001 6:19 AM
Subject: Re: gcc-2.95.3 is released.
> On Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 08:33:35PM -0800, Tim Prince wrote:
> >Fortunately, the mainline gcc-3.0 snapshots seem much more in favor
of
> >cygwin, but I see that none of the last 3 of David Billingsworth's
> >patches to make the testsuite go on cygwin have been included in the
> >distribution as of today.
>
> I've been pretty active in accepting David's patches but I can't
approve
> the ones that are outside of my area of responsibility, unfortunately.
>
> I have a couple of patches that I need to get to but they only deal
with
> reducing the number of warnings produced by the compilation of gcc.
They
> shouldn't impact the test suite.
>
> cgf
>
> --
> Want to unsubscribe from this list?
> Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
>
--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
- Raw text -