From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9678 invoked by alias); 27 Nov 2001 14:47:09 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 9636 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2001 14:47:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nic.osagesoftware.com) (65.186.161.49) by hostedprojects.ges.redhat.com with SMTP; 27 Nov 2001 14:47:03 -0000 Received: from maple.osagesoftware.com (maple.osagesoftware.com [192.168.1.20]) by nic.osagesoftware.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id fAREl2I04568 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 09:47:02 -0500 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20011127094533.00b39dc0@mail.osagesoftware.com> X-Sender: relson@mail.osagesoftware.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 10:40:00 -0000 To: gdb@sources.redhat.com From: David Relson Subject: Re: 5.1 ERRATA file? In-Reply-To: <3C033A28.50209@cygnus.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-SW-Source: 2001-11/txt/msg00182.txt.bz2 At 02:00 AM 11/27/01, Andrew Cagney wrote: >Something I noticed from the feedback so far is that it is hard to know >what problems a release will have - they are burried in the file >gdb/README. What do people think of them being moved to the file >gdb/ERRATA? Then again, the GNU coding standard might override such an >idea :-/ Andrew, I like the idea. The name ERRATA is clear and, as with all files with all-caps in their names, it stands out in a directory listing. David From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Relson To: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: 5.1 ERRATA file? Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 06:47:00 -0000 Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20011127094533.00b39dc0@mail.osagesoftware.com> References: <3C033A28.50209@cygnus.com> X-SW-Source: 2001-11/msg00289.html Message-ID: <20011127064700._ioOE6CvaMuG2hSvCIvmkzksBL1Cbe1TgBdPJJiu7OU@z> At 02:00 AM 11/27/01, Andrew Cagney wrote: >Something I noticed from the feedback so far is that it is hard to know >what problems a release will have - they are burried in the file >gdb/README. What do people think of them being moved to the file >gdb/ERRATA? Then again, the GNU coding standard might override such an >idea :-/ Andrew, I like the idea. The name ERRATA is clear and, as with all files with all-caps in their names, it stands out in a directory listing. David