Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 15:47:20 +0300
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender: halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To: sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu
Message-Id: <1659-Fri24May2002154720+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
X-Mailer: emacs 21.2.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
CC: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <10205240339.AA17287@clio.rice.edu> (sandmann@clio.rice.edu)
Subject: Re: refresh++
References:  <10205240339 DOT AA17287 AT clio DOT rice DOT edu>
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

> From: sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu
> Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 22:39:28 -0500 (CDT)
> 
> Plans are to refresh with the following files:
> 
> readme.1st         win2k/xp doc updates
> djdev203.(ver,dsm) update version and misc dsm fixes
> djgpp.env          env variable updates
> string.h           gcc 3.x fix
> djtypes.h          gcc 3.x fix
> 
> No plans to try any binary updates.  Is that what everyone remembered?

There was a talk about patching stat for the device bit, but IIRC the
consensus was not to include that in the refresh.  Here's an excerpt
from one message I kept in my archives:
   
    3) stat win2k device bit patch.  Changes libc.a, source distributions, 
       really should update binaries too.  Lots of work, not noticed in
       months of testing until after release.  Defer (probably til 2.04?)