From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22634 invoked by alias); 16 Apr 2003 00:48:38 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 22627 invoked from network); 16 Apr 2003 00:48:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 16 Apr 2003 00:48:37 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3G0mXD19224; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 20:48:33 -0400 Received: from pobox.corp.redhat.com (pobox.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.156]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3G0mXq06239; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 20:48:33 -0400 Received: from redhat.com (vpn50-16.rdu.redhat.com [172.16.50.16]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3G0mWg14136; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 20:48:32 -0400 Received: by redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 201) id A7A061B71C; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 20:48:41 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 02:16:00 -0000 From: Christopher Faylor To: DJ Delorie Cc: gdr@integrable-solutions.net, stl@caltech.edu, gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: GCC-3.2.3 prerelease, 1st iteration Message-ID: <20030416004841.GB16281@redhat.com> Mail-Followup-To: DJ Delorie , gdr@integrable-solutions.net, stl@caltech.edu, gcc@gcc.gnu.org References: <000001c30156$979bef20$3c9fd783@northwood> <200304141858.h3EIwqQ24864@greed.delorie.com> <200304151645.h3FGjwk06459@greed.delorie.com> <200304152207.h3FM7c013338@greed.delorie.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200304152207.h3FM7c013338@greed.delorie.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-04/txt/msg00745.txt.bz2 On Tue, Apr 15, 2003 at 06:07:38PM -0400, DJ Delorie wrote: >>Thank you. So, who is the official MinGW maintainer? Christopher >>Faylor? > >I think the way it works is, there are a few cygwin/mingw gcc folks, >and either Chris or I just reviewed their patches and approved them. >But I've been out of the cygwin loop long enough that I can't reliably >review their patches any more. I guess it's just me these days, then. cgf