Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT cygwin DOT com
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 21:34:22 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: fastcall
Message-ID: <20020408013422.GA12297@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
References: <20020408010745 DOT GA11990 AT redhat DOT com> <20020408012820 DOT 77478 DOT qmail AT web14507 DOT mail DOT yahoo DOT com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20020408012820.77478.qmail@web14507.mail.yahoo.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23.1i

On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 11:28:20AM +1000, Danny Smith wrote:
> --- Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at
>08:29:29AM +1000, Danny Smith wrote:
>> >maintainer.  There are currently  bugs in binutils with respect to ld
>> >--shared (or at least there was two weeks ago and has been since 17
>> [UTC]
>> >December).  
>> 
>> URL?  I don't see anything obvious in the subject.
>http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/2002-01/msg00477.html
>http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/2002-02/msg00624.html

Oh yes, that one.  Oh well.

>> >Chris asked the question a while ago: "Wanna be a binutils maintainer".
>> 
>> Yeah.  I asked for binutils maintainer and binutils and gcc cygwin
>> package maintainers.  gcc 3.1 presents a challenge in that some of my
>> local hacks will no longer work.  I have an idea about how to kludge
>> around that fact without impacting the rest of gcc but I don't really
>> have much time for much programming anymore.
>> 
>> However, I'll ask nickc if he minds if I start trying to clear out some
>> of the binutils issues.
>> 
>> Danny, do you mind checking things in, if I get approval? 
>
>Does write access to winsup also give me write[-after-approval] access to
>binutils?

I don't know the binutils policy, actually.  I think it probably does.

You do have the capability of checking something in but not necessarily
the permission to do so.

>If so, I am happy checking in windres patches.   The checksum
>patch is a bit more intrusive into BFD-land and needs review. 

I asked DJ to reevaluate that one a week or so ago.  Have you tried it?
If it just modifies pe-specific code, I'd say we should ping the author to
see if he has any further tweaks (this patch has a two or three month
history) and, if not, check it in.

Anyway, I've asked for a ruling on this from Nick Clifton.  It's a
little odd to do this since Nick works for me now but hey, that's the
free software world for ya.

cgf