Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 16:22:40 -0400
Message-Id: <200105102022.QAA24144@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: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <9003-Thu10May2001231828+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
Subject: Re: DJGPP is based on ...
References: <20010509174656 DOT A326 AT lauras DOT lt> <Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1010510122204 DOT 4017C-100000 AT is> <20010510213753 DOT B297 AT lauras DOT lt> <9003-Thu10May2001231828+0300-eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


> My problem is that DJGPP is not mentioned, as if it didn't exist, not
> with the fact that GCC maintainers don't develop the DJGPP port.

But, to get mentioned as a primary/secondary platform we (the djgpp
gcc maintainers) need to participate in their processes according to
their rules, something that we are only recently beginning to do.  So,
now is the time to investigate these listings and see about getting on
them.

Of course, you could post a patch to the web pages (they're in cvs) to
gcc-patches AT gcc DOT gnu DOT org if you feel DJGPP should be added to specific
places.  It definitely won't get added if nobody asks to have it
added.