X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f
Message-ID: <4489A2DE.7050203@iki.fi>
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 19:33:34 +0300
From: Andris Pavenis <andris DOT pavenis AT iki DOT fi>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.2 (X11/20060420)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: 
References: <1713 DOT 220 DOT 233 DOT 177 DOT 46 DOT 1149833809 DOT squirrel AT cafemail DOT mcadcafe DOT com>
In-Reply-To: <1713.220.233.177.46.1149833809.squirrel@cafemail.mcadcafe.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

decker AT dacafe DOT com kirjoitti:
> Hello.
> 
>>> I am trying to understand the issues that are preventing DJGPP 2.04 from
>>> release.
>> See
>> http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~phekda/richdawe/djgpp/2.04/status204.html
>>
>> There's a list of issues there.
> 
> First, sorry about any previous "posts" of mine that didn't make sense :(
> 
> I am wondering why the 2.04 status page is being maintained on the site of
> someone no longer active with the project.
> 
> Who is the 2.04 release manager at this point in time?
> 
> Which of the issues listed on aforementioned website are truly holding
> 2.04 release back? Priority 1, 2, or all of them (because I doubt at tthis
> rate that you will ever get them *all* fixed).
> 
> The 2.04 support pages should definitely be moved to someone active
> withthe project. TThe current situation *appears* pretty dead actually.

Well. I see also very little activity on my webpage, where I put 
archives of GCC-4.1.1 for DJGPP. Most feedback is about GCC-4.1.1 
Linux-to-DJGPP cross-compiler RPMs, which are also there. Don't however 
ask me to put DJGPP v2.04 status page there as I will not have enough 
time for maintaining it.

I think, that it's really a time simply to throw what we have at the 
users and release it as 2.04. I'm afraid, that otherwise it will never 
be done. Of course also DJGPP v2.04 does not build with current GCC, so 
one must use gcc-3.3.6 or maybe gcc-3.4.4. Current version is of course 
not ideal, but I don't believe that we ever have better unless it will 
be released.

Andris