From: sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann)
Message-Id: <10206101920.AA21007@clio.rice.edu>
Subject: Re: v2.03 update 2
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 14:20:40 -0500 (CDT)
Cc: rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk
In-Reply-To: <3D046B76.BDAE8C20@phekda.freeserve.co.uk> from "Richard Dawe" at Jun 10, 2002 10:03:50 AM
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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

> I have a couple of comments, after looking at djdev203_u2.zip:
> 
> * sys/djtypes.h and string.h don't have a copyright line for 2002.

I can believe that.  Worth adding?

> * In djdev203.ver perhaps you could put 'June 2002' instead of '6/2002'.

Could do so. I just modified what was done for refresh 1.  Worth changing?

> I extracted all of djdev203_u2.zip except djgpp.env over my current DJGPP
> installation and then rebuilt DJGPP CVS + gcc 3.1 patches in a work area.

Have you hand edited your djgpp.env?  Some reason not to test the new version?

> I also built and ran some tests in tests/libc/ansi/stdio. FWIW that all 
> worked fine.

Thanks.  This is mostly documentation and a few lines of fixes, I didn't
expect much bad to happen.  Did the DSM look OK?