Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner@sources.redhat.com
Message-ID: <006901c12070$e8e8ee50$d2823bd5@dmitry>
From: "Dmitry Timoshkov" <dmitry@baikal.ru>
To: <cygwin@cygwin.com>
References: <20010807163431.A31008@redhat.com> <011f01c11fd7$a18a9c50$cd823bd5@dmitry> <20010808111705.E4406@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: binutils is no longer experimental
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 09:15:30 +0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="koi8-r"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

"Christopher Faylor" <cgf@redhat.com> wrote:

> >> I got enough reports from trustworthy people to move the binutils cygwin
> >> release from "experimental" to "current".
> >
> >Hello Christopher.
> >
> >On 18 May 2001 I had sent the attached patch to a binutils mailing list.
> >DJ Delorie had approved my patch, but it never was commited. I suspect
> >that it wasn't because I had made diff against binutils-20010425-2 provided
> >by Cygwin and that diff could not be cleanly applied to a raw binutils cvs.
> 
> If DJ approved the patch then he should commit it.
> 
> I would just ping DJ.

Thanks for your answer. Could you please answer one more: why binutils
provided by Cygwin distribution is so different from the ordinal one?
Is it planned to do a merge?

Thanks.
--
Dmitry.


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/