Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 10:58:46 -0400
Message-Id: <200105101458.KAA21645@envy.delorie.com>
X-Authentication-Warning: envy.delorie.com: dj set sender to dj AT envy DOT delorie DOT com using -f
From: DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1010510122204.4017C-100000@is> (message from Eli
	Zaretskii on Thu, 10 May 2001 12:26:37 +0300 (IDT))
Subject: Re: DJGPP is based on ...
References:  <Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1010510122204 DOT 4017C-100000 AT is>
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


> Personally, I find it disturbing that one of the oldest GCC ports,
> which is in continuous maintenance since 1989, is never--not once,
> except in some obscure place in the FAQ--mentioned in the GCC Web
> pages.  Perhaps I'm naive.

The DJGPP port has traditionally been maintained independently of the
main gcc development.  That has recently started changing, as more and
more djgpp/gcc developers join the discussions on gcc.gnu.org, and as
djgpp's version of gcc becomes more and more mainstream.  As for being
a primary platform, the key is that *we* must provide resources
responsible for fixing bugs, making sure it's ready for releases, and
such.