Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Message-ID: <006901c12070$e8e8ee50$d2823bd5@dmitry> From: "Dmitry Timoshkov" To: References: <20010807163431 DOT A31008 AT redhat DOT com> <011f01c11fd7$a18a9c50$cd823bd5 AT dmitry> <20010808111705 DOT E4406 AT redhat DOT 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 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 "Christopher Faylor" 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/