From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27640 invoked by alias); 9 Jul 2009 17:03:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 27288 invoked by uid 22791); 9 Jul 2009 17:03:15 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx2.redhat.com (HELO mx2.redhat.com) (66.187.237.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 09 Jul 2009 17:03:10 +0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n69H37pu025025; Thu, 9 Jul 2009 13:03:07 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n69H36uo013179; Thu, 9 Jul 2009 13:03:06 -0400 Received: from dhcp-10-15-16-104.yyz.redhat.com (vpn-51-26.sfbay.redhat.com [10.14.51.26]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n69H34x4022802; Thu, 9 Jul 2009 13:03:05 -0400 Message-ID: <4A5622C8.2090601@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2009 17:03:00 -0000 From: Dave Brolley User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (X11/20090105) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Doug Evans CC: fche@redhat.com, cgen@sourceware.org Subject: Re: remove dups from cgen/cpu? References: <20090709160851.B60D36E3D1@sebabeach.org> In-Reply-To: <20090709160851.B60D36E3D1@sebabeach.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cgen-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cgen-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-q3/txt/msg00016.txt.bz2 Doug Evans wrote: > Hi. > > I think it's time to remove the duplicates in src/cgen/cpu > and keep just the copies in src/cpu. > > Any objections? > > [Are there any that Redhat wants to keep in src/cgen/cpu, > at least for now?] > I have no objections to the removal of duplicates. Although it has been explained to me several times, I keep forgetting why we needed src/cpu vs src/cgen/cpu at all. > [Some files, e.g. sh*, have signficant differences. > I was going to leave resolving those for another pass, > and just do the ones with no or simple differences first.] > Wrt sh, the work in src/cpu is most up to date. Dave