From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <binutils-return-39857-listarch-binutils=sources.redhat.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 24187 invoked by alias); 20 Apr 2005 14:15:11 -0000
Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:binutils-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/>
List-Post: <mailto:binutils@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:binutils-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: binutils-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 24068 invoked from network); 20 Apr 2005 14:15:00 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31)
  by sourceware.org with SMTP; 20 Apr 2005 14:15:00 -0000
Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254])
	by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j3KEF0NT028458
	for <binutils@sources.redhat.com>; Wed, 20 Apr 2005 10:15:00 -0400
Received: from pobox.surrey.redhat.com (pobox.surrey.redhat.com [172.16.10.17])
	by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id j3KEExO29169;
	Wed, 20 Apr 2005 10:14:59 -0400
Received: from [172.31.0.98] (vpnuser7.surrey.redhat.com [172.16.9.7])
	by pobox.surrey.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j3KEEvkk014923;
	Wed, 20 Apr 2005 15:14:58 +0100
Message-ID: <42666395.3050501@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 14:15:00 -0000
From: Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (X11/20041206)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ralf Corsepius <ralf.corsepius@rtems.org>
CC: Binutils List <binutils@sources.redhat.com>,
        Joel Sherrill <joel.sherrill@OARcorp.com>
Subject: Re: binutils-2.16 news
References: <20050420071453.GC3052@bubble.modra.org>	 <1113986765.18714.87.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local>	 <42662352.9040107@redhat.com> <1113992171.18714.130.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local>
In-Reply-To: <1113992171.18714.130.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SW-Source: 2005-04/txt/msg00557.txt.bz2

Hi Ralf,

>>No, the h8300-elf port is still going to be valid.  It is just that at 
>>the moment it looks like nobody wants to step up and champion the 
>>h8300-coff and h8300-rtems ports...
> 
> OK, I understand, the reason is coff?
> 
> I'll have to check if rtems can change to elf.

Or just shout loudly enough.  The other reason for publishing that list 
of proposed ports to deprecate was to find out if anybody cared.  If you 
care about the h8300-rtems port and if you believe that it has a future, 
then we will remove it from the depcreated list.  (Even better would be 
if you volunteered to maintain it).

Cheers
   Nick