From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-131773-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 26647 invoked by alias); 25 Oct 2004 19:21:25 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 26640 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2004 19:21:24 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31)
  by sourceware.org with SMTP; 25 Oct 2004 19:21:24 -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 i9PJLHTZ026807;
	Mon, 25 Oct 2004 15:21:22 -0400
Received: from post-office.corp.redhat.com (post-office.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.227])
	by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i9PJLHr13124;
	Mon, 25 Oct 2004 15:21:17 -0400
Received: from greed.delorie.com (dj.cipe.redhat.com [10.0.0.222])
	by post-office.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i9PJLG827510;
	Mon, 25 Oct 2004 15:21:17 -0400
Received: from greed.delorie.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by greed.delorie.com (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9PJLGYP026467;
	Mon, 25 Oct 2004 15:21:16 -0400
Received: (from dj@localhost)
	by greed.delorie.com (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id i9PJLGZk026463;
	Mon, 25 Oct 2004 15:21:16 -0400
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 20:25:00 -0000
Message-Id: <200410251921.i9PJLGZk026463@greed.delorie.com>
From: DJ Delorie <dj@redhat.com>
To: aaronavay62@aaronwl.com
CC: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, gp@qnx.com, ericw@evcohs.com
In-reply-to: <417D5207.7080604@aaronwl.com> (aaronavay62@aaronwl.com)
Subject: Re: [PING] Windows patches.
References: <417AB82F.4030405@aaronwl.com> <200410251858.i9PIw8tQ025887@greed.delorie.com> <417D5207.7080604@aaronwl.com>
X-SW-Source: 2004-10/txt/msg02087.txt.bz2


> For these targets, this patch restores the behavior of fixincludes
> builds before it was moved to toplevel.
> 
> Does the patch really need to be signed off by all of these maintainers?
>  Unless since fixincludes moved to toplevel one of these targets added

If this is functionality that just got forgotten in the move, it's
probably "obvious enough" to check it in.  Go ahead.