>>Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 10:03:31 -0500
>>> From: Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>
>>
>>>> > 
>>>> > What do we gain by removing something that continues to be a major
>>>> > problem from the file named PROBLEMS?  I just don't get it.
>>
>>> 
>>> Please read my most recent reply from yesterday.
> 
> 
> Andrew, I did read your reply, and I still don't get it; please bear
> with us.
> 
> Assuming that we only leave in PROBLEMS those bugs that have visible
> user-level effect, do you still object to have there bugs from old
> versions?  If so, please tell why you think users should not know
> about them.

Er, this is what I wrote:

> I'm objecting to:
> 
>>> "Regressions since gdb 6.0"
>>> and "Regressions since gdb 5.3".

> If specific problems are present in 6.1 and are going to _really_ hurt the user then they should be mentioned (if they happened to be in 6.0 as well, oops).
> 
> However, we should not allow PROBLEMS to accumulate just because they are still present -- heavy editing is required to ensure that the PROBLEMS file is both relevant and focused (Several releases back I deleted chunks of README as, although technically correct, they were simply not relevant). 

Put simply those titles should be removed.

Andrew