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 23:24:50 -0500
Message-Id: <200011210424.XAA11136@envy.delorie.com>
X-Authentication-Warning: envy.delorie.com: dj set sender to dj AT envy DOT delorie DOT com using -f
From: DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
To: rth AT redhat 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
In-reply-to: <20001120202356.A17461@redhat.com> (message from Richard
	Henderson on Mon, 20 Nov 2000 20:23:56 -0800)
Subject: Re: Reason for cygwin GCC 2.97 non-bootstrap found
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> <20001120202356 DOT A17461 AT redhat DOT com>


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

No, but a generic valloc would make sense in libiberty.  If the final
solution includes a generic valloc implementation, it might make more
sense to put that in libiberty rather than gcc.

You're right that it's not a *pressing* reason, but it is something to
consider.

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