From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10439 invoked by alias); 9 Jun 2004 23:40:12 -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 10404 invoked from network); 9 Jun 2004 23:40:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 9 Jun 2004 23:40:08 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i59Ne8i5023220; Wed, 9 Jun 2004 19:40:08 -0400 Received: from post-office.corp.redhat.com (post-office.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.227]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i59Ne8031897; Wed, 9 Jun 2004 19:40:08 -0400 Received: from greed.delorie.com (dj.cipe.redhat.com [10.0.0.222]) by post-office.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i59Ne4D05007; Wed, 9 Jun 2004 19:40:05 -0400 Received: from greed.delorie.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by greed.delorie.com (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i59Ne3AZ028308; Wed, 9 Jun 2004 19:40:03 -0400 Received: (from dj@localhost) by greed.delorie.com (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id i59Ne3FT028298; Wed, 9 Jun 2004 19:40:03 -0400 Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 23:40:00 -0000 Message-Id: <200406092340.i59Ne3FT028298@greed.delorie.com> From: DJ Delorie To: bje+dated+1087082546.3be047@air.net.au CC: binutils@sources.redhat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <20040610092223.A1221@mailhub.air.net.au> (message from Ben Elliston on Thu, 10 Jun 2004 09:22:23 +1000) Subject: Re: top-level removal of dejagnu, expect References: <20040610092223.A1221@mailhub.air.net.au> X-SW-Source: 2004-06/txt/msg00203.txt.bz2 > In preparation for the removal of src/{dejagnu,expect}. > Okay to commit? 1. Have you asked EVERY project that uses the src repository? binutils and gdb aren't the only projects. Why not just remove those directories from the modules file instead? cgf has already mentioned that src/expect has cygwin-specific code in it. 2. Our internal repository has a customized dejagnu; it would be convenient for us if support for an in-tree dejagnu were maintained. Likewise for other developers who may want to (or need to) customize dejagnu for new ports in conjunction with porting the tools. So, I would prefer that support for an in-tree dejagnu were retained. Even if dejagnu and expect were totally wiped from the src repository, the toplevel changes would not be needed to support that change, so claiming that change is "in preparation for" the removal is misleading. I suggest doing it later, after the dust settles, if at all.