From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4714 invoked by alias); 2 Jul 2002 21:36:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: binutils-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 4667 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2002 21:36:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO potter.sfbay.redhat.com) (205.180.83.107) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 2 Jul 2002 21:36:02 -0000 Received: from greed.delorie.com (cse.sfbay.redhat.com [205.180.230.236]) by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g62Lb8Q17803; Tue, 2 Jul 2002 14:37:08 -0700 Received: (from dj@localhost) by greed.delorie.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g62LZu020212; Tue, 2 Jul 2002 17:35:56 -0400 Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 14:36:00 -0000 Message-Id: <200207022135.g62LZu020212@greed.delorie.com> From: DJ Delorie To: mark@codesourcery.com CC: neroden@doctormoo.dyndns.org, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, binutils@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <57280000.1025640066@warlock.codesourcery.com> (message from Mark Mitchell on Tue, 02 Jul 2002 13:01:06 -0700) Subject: Re: don't build send-pr,prms,gnats.tar References: <57280000.1025640066@warlock.codesourcery.com> X-SW-Source: 2002-07/txt/msg00050.txt.bz2 > On the other hand, I think it's important we clarify this somewhat; > I have already received one email asking a question about whether or > not your message implies that Red Hat is somehow "special". So, I > am going to try to answer that question here. Right, sorry, that was my "dj as a red hat employee" response, not my "dj as a maintainer" response. The pattern is this: we ask if anyone's using a target, if either (1) nobody says they are, or (2) someone knows why the target is there and can explain why it isn't needed, then we take it out. In this case, I knew RH was using it so I spoke up. If anyone else spoke up for their targets, we would have kept those as well. Usually, of course, Stan tells us the sordid history of the target and we all agree to remove it ;) Obviously, if there's a benefit to removing something RH still needs, well, that's RH's problem. If we (RH) can't justify it to the net community, we (RH) will just have to figure out a way to deal with it. Sorry for the confusion.