From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 102179 invoked by alias); 23 Jan 2017 09:01:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact java-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: java-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 102065 invoked by uid 89); 23 Jan 2017 09:01:28 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-5.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=Hx-languages-length:220, H*f:sk:e5876de, H*i:sk:e5876de, H*MI:sk:e5876de X-Spam-User: qpsmtpd, 2 recipients X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 09:01:27 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 935B180B56; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 09:01:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from zebedee.pink ([10.33.36.34]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id v0N91PZw017794; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 04:01:26 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Delete GCJ To: Per Bothner , Gerald Pfeifer References: <78f841e7-808b-58d0-7913-3ec0d19630a0@redhat.com> <610ea470-7197-2f55-1fee-23f89a443460@redhat.com> Cc: GCC Patches , GCJ-patches From: Andrew Haley Message-ID: <0b80d6e7-b1f5-e120-7223-76f93f2c6d6d@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 09:01:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2017-q1/txt/msg00015.txt.bz2 On 22/01/17 18:41, Per Bothner wrote: > In my opinion, all/most of these should be restored. Because of the historical interest? That's a good point, and perhaps I was too hasty. Sorry. Andrew.