DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 delorie.com 609HeFFJ2583715 Authentication-Results: delorie.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=delorie.com Authentication-Results: delorie.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=delorie.com X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f Authentication-Results: delorie.com; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=172.31.3.1 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=delorie.com; s=key; t=1767980414; cv=none; b=sC9xbhMmmuGpokyafMuSGpZHUtRrEpnFvDwspIgg0+eb3nYi9LokIzzzvPO2vsihyb0+Kbk+eCYg6TO/7U5Xdkbm16LARZZqpe64l1TEW0zzWTAVLlzBptsg+nNUTdv9L+gf84PRhWAwvV9SZDimHfubIO2W2vmlkVe6ZD4UuuY= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=delorie.com; s=key; t=1767980414; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Nt1d0XOT2eL2mfJbkFFeWFvjT8/d6Y87ThaItkKGn9I=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version; b=oieAwLcROve83mo/0z/mtWSmPOl3EjeWqHPh8B0RYqSM5A60byXAYipg54RR1aD1fWg3kJs5nwoszT1Fe+KTz0dadEc97xVlfBBcMKB084Z8rgaOLUO9cs8WccEXqNgAptEbQ748DyCOfWCIE4QMHSYK/GaKp5LnpyiDoOER2M8= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; delorie.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=delorie.com; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=delorie.com DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 delorie.com 609HeEsK2583693 Authentication-Results: delorie.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=delorie.com Authentication-Results: delorie.com; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=delorie.com X-Authentication-Warning: envy.delorie.com: dj set sender to dj AT delorie DOT com using -f From: "DJ Delorie (dj AT delorie DOT com) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com]" To: Simon Marchi Cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: Supported debug info formats In-Reply-To: (message from Simon Marchi on Fri, 9 Jan 2026 12:39:22 -0500) Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2026 12:40:14 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain 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 Simon Marchi writes: > Ok thanks, I will propose a patch to remove the obsolete stuff from > coffread.c. Is it fine if I CC you on it so you can verify that it > doesn't remove anything still important? I've been out of the loop so long I don't think my opinion would be useful any more ;-)