From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18497 invoked by alias); 6 May 2002 14:54:39 -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 18400 invoked from network); 6 May 2002 14:54:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.localdomain) (66.60.148.227) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 6 May 2002 14:54:34 -0000 Received: from warlock.codesourcery.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.localdomain (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g46ErX612011; Mon, 6 May 2002 07:53:33 -0700 Date: Mon, 06 May 2002 07:54:00 -0000 From: Mark Mitchell To: Andreas Schwab cc: "gcc@gcc.gnu.org" , "dewar@gnat.com" Subject: Re: GCC 3.1 Release Message-ID: <42690000.1020696812@warlock.codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-SW-Source: 2002-05/txt/msg00394.txt.bz2 --On Monday, May 06, 2002 12:24:31 PM +0200 Andreas Schwab wrote: > Florian Weimer writes: > > |> Mark Mitchell writes: > |> > |> > Therefore, as of now, I will be accepting *no* patches that do not > fix |> > regressions. > |> > |> Can we change the following two things, even if they aren't > |> regressions? > > They _are_ regressions, because they cause bootstrap failures. May I have a pointer to the patches you want checked in? Thanks, -- Mark Mitchell mark@codesourcery.com CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com