Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2001 21:24:13 +0200
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender: halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To: Andris Pavenis <pavenis AT lanet DOT lv>
Message-Id: <7458-Mon05Nov2001212413+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
X-Mailer: emacs 21.1.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
CC: dj AT delorie DOT com, djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <Pine.A41.4.05.10111051835260.70556-100000@ieva06> (message from
	Andris Pavenis on Mon, 5 Nov 2001 18:52:09 +0200 (WET))
Subject: Re: Old files in DJGPP distribution
References:  <Pine DOT A41 DOT 4 DOT 05 DOT 10111051835260 DOT 70556-100000 AT ieva06>
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2001 18:52:09 +0200 (WET)
> From: Andris Pavenis <pavenis AT lanet DOT lv>
> > 
> > acnf    212 213 250
> 
> I think both 2.13 and 2.50 should stay. Most packages are still not
> compatible with 2.50 (for example gcc). Perhaps 2.12 can be removed

Yes, I agree.

> I don't know whether we should keep gcc-2.95.2. One reason for keeping
> is that *d.zip packages are generated for 2.95.2 burt not later versions

We could keep only the *2952d.zip files and remove the rest.  Or
Someone(tm) could produce the *d.zip files for GCC 3.0.2 ;-)