From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6919 invoked by alias); 15 Jan 2003 17:13:54 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 6911 invoked from network); 15 Jan 2003 17:13:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO duracef.shout.net) (204.253.184.12) by 209.249.29.67 with SMTP; 15 Jan 2003 17:13:52 -0000 Received: (from mec@localhost) by duracef.shout.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h0FHDXJ27116; Wed, 15 Jan 2003 11:13:33 -0600 Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 17:13:00 -0000 From: Michael Elizabeth Chastain Message-Id: <200301151713.h0FHDXJ27116@duracef.shout.net> To: ac131313@redhat.com Subject: Re: error building gcc , (simulators and targets...) Cc: drow@mvista.com, gdb@sources.redhat.com X-SW-Source: 2003-01/txt/msg00271.txt.bz2 It is happening to multiple people. It also happened to Johan Vermeire as well (PR gdb/915). Johan also got stuck because his MS Win2K + IE 6.0 browser couldn't file a bug report, and then nobody looked at his mail to gdb-bug@gnu.org. Preventing PR's with better doco is a good thing, both for the users and for us. Better doco will help our direct users, and then our channel partners, partners, the cross-gcc FAQ people, can uptake our new doco or refer to it in their doco. That part won't happen overnight. The most recent cross-gcc FAQ I've seen is from 1999! (Honestly, I think gdb could benefit from lots of re-engineering for our customer-facing business processes, I'm reading a Patricia Seybold book and all this goobledygook actually does apply to the gdb project, in my mind at least). So I'll write that doco and submit it soon. Michael C