Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
list-help: <mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
list-post: <mailto:cygwin-apps AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Sender: cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu
Message-ID: <3921EB9E.59B408BC@ece.gatech.edu>
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 20:45:18 -0400
From: Charles Wilson <cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; U; SunOS 5.7 sun4u)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Chris Faylor <cgf AT cygnus DOT com>
CC: cygwin-apps AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com, Mumit Khan <khan AT xraylith DOT wisc DOT EDU>
Subject: Re: [general] some ideas & request for comments (LONG)
References: <3920CB0D DOT C5971C34 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <3921BABA DOT 31C7D040 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <20000516180148 DOT D15344 AT cygnus DOT com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Chris Faylor wrote:
> 
> On Tue, May 16, 2000 at 05:16:42PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
> >>
> >> Assuming binutils/gcc accept my patches (or at least the maintainers of
> >> the cygwin ports of those packages), then I vote for option (d).
> >>
> >
> >It seems that the binutils portion of my desired patches were accepted
> >into the main binutils tree. However, this may or may not affect the
> >version distributed with cygwin.
> >
> >Now I'll try to get the [even more minor] patches to gcc accepted. :-)
> 
> The only problem is that the current version of binutils + bfd is in a
> pretty uncertain state as far as PE for windows is concerned.  I don't
> think it is close to being stable yet.
> 
> We're using a known stable version of the tools that Mumit provided.
> 
> Maybe he'll want to incorporate your changes into his stuff or allow you
> to provide a new version of binutils + gcc for latest.

I sortof remember that discussion -- someone was wondering why we're
"still" using 19990818. I was mostly hoping that *if* the binutils folks
accepted the patch, then Mumit would also accept the patch for "his"
version, so that whenever "binutils-19990818-2.tar.gz" was released, it
would have this patch. (I do NOT think this patch by itself is enough
reason to rush out a new binutils package right away, whether it's me or
Mumit or whomever).

--Chuck