From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3354 invoked by alias); 30 Jun 2005 21:17:05 -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 3294 invoked by uid 22791); 30 Jun 2005 21:16:59 -0000 Received: from mailhub.air.net.au (HELO mailhub.air.net.au) (203.11.71.23) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Thu, 30 Jun 2005 21:16:59 +0000 Received: by mailhub.air.net.au (Postfix, from userid 500) id 1FC2C36DCE; Fri, 1 Jul 2005 07:16:55 +1000 (EST) Received: by mailhub.air.net.au (tmda-sendmail, from uid 500); Fri, 01 Jul 2005 07:16:54 +1000 (EST) Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 21:17:00 -0000 To: DJ Delorie Cc: binutils@sources.redhat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: some top-level changes Message-ID: <20050701071650.B11816@mailhub.air.net.au> References: <20050630170643.A4871@mailhub.air.net.au> <200506302049.j5UKnXmC012925@greed.delorie.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-md5; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="uQr8t48UFsdbeI+V" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <200506302049.j5UKnXmC012925@greed.delorie.com>; from dj@redhat.com on Thu, Jun 30, 2005 at 04:49:33PM -0400 X-Delivery-Agent: TMDA/1.0.2 (Bold Forbes) From: Ben Elliston X-Primary-Address: bje@air.net.au X-SW-Source: 2005-06/txt/msg00391.txt.bz2 --uQr8t48UFsdbeI+V Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-length: 467 > We have a number of other projects listed there that aren't part of > our source trees (like "hello" or "textutils"). Why can't expect > and dejagnu have the same status? Is there any harm in leaving them > in? You never know when some third party (Red Hat Inc comes to > mind) will want to build everything in one tree themselves. This is the objection I was anticipating and, if that's considered to be the case, then that's fine. Patch withdrawn. :-) Ben --uQr8t48UFsdbeI+V Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline Content-length: 189 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCxGFCbNtDbHIEhSURArSIAKDwv9hJ/ni6RXsYVuCQHOoFA1NJjwCg7oDZ 6InRQaPTok6Jzhh7W2APkmQ= =yTu5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --uQr8t48UFsdbeI+V--