From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18786 invoked by alias); 16 Aug 2002 11:04:59 -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 18772 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2002 11:04:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO walton.kettenis.dyndns.org) (62.163.169.250) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 16 Aug 2002 11:04:57 -0000 Received: from elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org [192.168.0.2]) by walton.kettenis.dyndns.org (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g7GB4n1x000358; Fri, 16 Aug 2002 13:04:49 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from kettenis@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org) Received: from elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g7GB4mRg001512; Fri, 16 Aug 2002 13:04:48 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from kettenis@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org) Received: (from kettenis@localhost) by elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (8.12.5/8.12.5/Submit) id g7GB4mh6001509; Fri, 16 Aug 2002 13:04:48 +0200 (CEST) To: Andrew Cagney Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [patch/rfc] Obsolete the i960 target References: <3D5C30DD.8050405@ges.redhat.com> From: Mark Kettenis Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 04:04:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: Andrew Cagney's message of "Thu, 15 Aug 2002 18:53:17 -0400" Message-ID: <86elczkqsv.fsf@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> X-SW-Source: 2002-08/txt/msg00413.txt.bz2 Hey Andrew, I'm a little confused on how one deals with target/host-specific files when obsoleting a target or host. Sometimes we prefix all lines of such a file with // OBSOLETE, sometimes we just leave those files alone (like this patch for the i960 target does). I'm tempted to go with the latter (since it reduces the amount of work to do). Is that OK? Mark