From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24019 invoked by alias); 25 Sep 2004 16:43:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 24009 invoked from network); 25 Sep 2004 16:43:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO balder.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.15) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 25 Sep 2004 16:43:25 -0000 Received: from zaretski ([80.230.143.223]) by balder.inter.net.il (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.7-GR) with ESMTP id DUN77914 (AUTH halo1); Sat, 25 Sep 2004 18:43:20 +0200 (IST) Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 16:43:00 -0000 From: "Eli Zaretskii" To: Andrew Cagney Message-ID: <01c4a31e$Blat.v2.2.2$91a0d700@zahav.net.il> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 CC: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <4154372C.7080100@gnu.org> (message from Andrew Cagney on Fri, 24 Sep 2004 11:03:08 -0400) Subject: Re: [RFC] Suggested ways to remove the need for xm-go32.h Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <01c49d82$Blat.v2.2.2$23875ec0@zahav.net.il> <20040923050534.GA11936@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> <41526D73.nailWK21NVX4@mindspring.com> <20040923151802.GC968@gnat.com> <20040923175721.GA30999@nevyn.them.org> <4154372C.7080100@gnu.org> X-SW-Source: 2004-09/txt/msg00434.txt.bz2 > Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 11:03:08 -0400 > From: Andrew Cagney > Cc: Michael Chastain , me@cgf.cx, > gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com > > We've no evidence that we've a real problem here, and hence no evidence > that a wrapper is needed. All I see a dig achieving is to flush out > legacy systems on which GDB no longer builds. If someone with such a > legacy system really really needs a modern GDB then I'm sure that > they'll step up to the challenge of solving this and many other problem. Mark, how do you feel about losing the wrappers? Would it be okay for me to do it that way, or do you feel strongly about them?