From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11292 invoked by alias); 10 Jun 2004 02:15:03 -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 11278 invoked from network); 10 Jun 2004 02:15:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 10 Jun 2004 02:15:02 -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 i5A2F0i5026282; Wed, 9 Jun 2004 22:15:00 -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 i5A2F0004704; Wed, 9 Jun 2004 22:15:00 -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 i5A2ExD16689; Wed, 9 Jun 2004 22:14:59 -0400 Received: from greed.delorie.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by greed.delorie.com (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i5A2EwKR031156; Wed, 9 Jun 2004 22:14:58 -0400 Received: (from dj@localhost) by greed.delorie.com (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id i5A2Ew3P031152; Wed, 9 Jun 2004 22:14:58 -0400 Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 02:15:00 -0000 Message-Id: <200406100214.i5A2Ew3P031152@greed.delorie.com> From: DJ Delorie To: bje+dated+1087085689.0c7113@air.net.au CC: binutils@sources.redhat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <20040610101446.B3128@mailhub.air.net.au> (message from Ben Elliston on Thu, 10 Jun 2004 10:14:46 +1000) Subject: Re: top-level removal of dejagnu, expect References: <20040610092223.A1221@mailhub.air.net.au> <200406092340.i59Ne3FT028298@greed.delorie.com> <20040610101446.B3128@mailhub.air.net.au> X-SW-Source: 2004-06/txt/msg00207.txt.bz2 > I have asked the major players and got overwhelming support. I'd feel more comfortable if you asked all the players, not just the major ones. Call me paranoid ;-) > Removing the directories from the modules file is broken, as you > know. It should be possible to check those files out if they were > included in a past tag (which they were). Did this come up in the source control BOF? > I stated at the GCC Summit that, as a DejaGnu maintainer, I will be > responsive to urgent bug fixes. I don't doubt you will, but I was referring to porting, not fixing. Red Hat has a lot of internal ports that we support through our in-tree dejagnu that are still under NDA.