From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-40316-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 17160 invoked by alias); 18 Jul 2005 17:59:53 -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 17109 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Jul 2005 17:59:48 -0000
Received: from sibelius.xs4all.nl (HELO sibelius.xs4all.nl) (82.92.89.47)
    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Mon, 18 Jul 2005 17:59:48 +0000
Received: from elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (root@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl [192.168.0.2])
	by sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j6IHwDGF020916;
	Mon, 18 Jul 2005 19:58:13 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (kettenis@localhost.sibelius.xs4all.nl [127.0.0.1])
	by elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.4/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j6IHwCQH003625;
	Mon, 18 Jul 2005 19:58:12 +0200 (CEST)
Received: (from kettenis@localhost)
	by elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id j6IHwCfM017492;
	Mon, 18 Jul 2005 19:58:12 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 17:59:00 -0000
Message-Id: <200507181758.j6IHwCfM017492@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl>
From: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
To: ian@airs.com
CC: me@cgf.cx, mark@codesourcery.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
In-reply-to: <m3fyuc12bg.fsf@gossamer.airs.com> (message from Ian Lance Taylor
	on 18 Jul 2005 09:55:31 -0700)
Subject: Re: Guidance re. MinGW and readline
References: <42DAF4FE.3060609@codesourcery.com>
	<200507180621.j6I6L9WO005075@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl>
	<20050718135801.GA17333@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> <m3fyuc12bg.fsf@gossamer.airs.com>
X-SW-Source: 2005-07/txt/msg00154.txt.bz2

   From: Ian Lance Taylor <ian@airs.com>
   Date: 18 Jul 2005 09:55:31 -0700

   Christopher Faylor <me@cgf.cx> writes:

   > Actually, I wonder if libiberty would be a better place for the minimal
   > termcap stuff.

   I don't see why, unless we seriously think that some program other
   than gdb is going to want to use it.  If I understand the earlier
   messages, the only point to the minimal termcap stuff is to use it
   with readline on MinGW.  That seems fairly special purpose to me, and
   not the sort of thing we usually put it into libiberty.

I agree with Ian here.  We should not add the additional burden of
maintining this both trees unless there actually is a benefit.

Mark