Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2002 12:08:54 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: suggestion for cygwin gcc-3.2
Message-ID: <20020817160854.GA1284@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <F210bPqPDBTBYFRQ3BP00003e4a AT hotmail DOT com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <F210bPqPDBTBYFRQ3BP00003e4a@hotmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23.1i

On Sat, Aug 17, 2002 at 05:57:43AM +0000, Gareth Pearce wrote:
>>This may generate some flames, so flame away if you want to.
>
>Hmm I expected a few as well, but no replys - I better fix that at
>least.

Maybe this will qualify as a flame.  People here often have very thin
skins, so...

No.  I'm not going to make the cygwin gcc operate any differently than
the standard gcc 3.2.  The correct place to lobby for change is in the
gcc mailing lists.

Wow.  Real scorcher.

cgf

--
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/