From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-18891-listarch-gdb-patches=sourceware.cygnus.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 28347 invoked by alias); 23 Sep 2002 11:32:16 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 28266 invoked from network); 23 Sep 2002 11:31:58 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO delorie.com) (207.22.48.162)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 23 Sep 2002 11:31:58 -0000
Received: from envy.delorie.com (envy.delorie.com [207.22.48.171])
	by delorie.com (8.11.6/8.9.1) with ESMTP id g8NBVtG25335;
	Mon, 23 Sep 2002 07:31:55 -0400
Received: (from dj@localhost)
	by envy.delorie.com (8.11.6/8.11.2) id g8NBVse02734;
	Mon, 23 Sep 2002 07:31:54 -0400
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 04:32:00 -0000
Message-Id: <200209231131.g8NBVse02734@envy.delorie.com>
X-Authentication-Warning: envy.delorie.com: dj set sender to dj@delorie.com using -f
From: DJ Delorie <dj@delorie.com>
To: aoliva@redhat.com
CC: neroden@doctormoo.dyndns.org, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org,
   gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, binutils@sources.redhat.com
In-reply-to: <orofaq6mlz.fsf@free.redhat.lsd.ic.unicamp.br> (message from
	Alexandre Oliva on 22 Sep 2002 13:00:08 -0300)
Subject: Re: toplevel configure.in: simplify tests
References: <20020921175849.GA31265@doctormoo.dyndns.org> <orofaq6mlz.fsf@free.redhat.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>
X-SW-Source: 2002-09/txt/msg00565.txt.bz2


> Hmm...  I think we're in bug-fix only mode in GCC mainline, so I'd
> approve this only to the gcc 3.4 small improvements branch.  But then,
> this would get GCC mainline out of sync with src, so DJ might be
> annoyed because his auto sync would stop working.  DJ, what do yo
> think?

There was a change just yesterday to gcc's toplevel files, so they're
already out of sync.  That change was described as a convenience
change, so it seems like the rules are flexible anyway.

It's three weeks until the 3.3 branch, unless it's delayed.  IMHO This
patch is harmless in the current tree, because we no longer support
cygnus-style configure anyway, so I would have no problem with it
going in.  But waiting a few weeks doesn't sound unreasonable either.