From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22644 invoked by alias); 13 Dec 2004 20:31:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact rda-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: rda-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 22606 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2004 20:31:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cgf.cx) (66.30.17.189) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 13 Dec 2004 20:31:23 -0000 Received: by cgf.cx (Postfix, from userid 201) id D9DF41B4C2; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 15:32:20 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 20:31:00 -0000 From: Christopher Faylor To: rda@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: RDA on Solaris and Win32 Message-ID: <20041213203220.GC27768@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> References: <20041208131241.08346412.kevinb@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20041208131241.08346412.kevinb@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-SW-Source: 2004-q4/txt/msg00042.txt.bz2 On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 01:12:41PM -0700, Kevin Buettner wrote: >On 08 Dec 2004 14:22:18 -0500 >Jim Blandy wrote: > >> Hmm. It seems that, although RDA includes code for Cygwin and >> Solaris, that code is not actually built by default when one >> configures the tree in the normal way on those platforms. All you get >> is the librda library. >> >> This means that we can't know if regenerating the auto* files >> introduces additional build problems for that platform-specific code >> without first making RDA actually build it again. I don't want to >> extend the scope of my project to include making the Cygwin and >> Solaris native support code build again. But evolving the surrounding >> support will inevitably bit-rot that stuff. It's the classic >> "unmaintained code" dilemma. >> >> Ideally, that stuff were made to build again, but limiting ourselves >> to actions we can afford to take immediately, what should our policy >> be? Here are the options I see, listed in order of decreasing >> preference for me: >> >> a) Declare Cygwin and Solaris native support to be unmaintained in the >> README file, but leave the sources in the tree. >> >> b) Delete the Cygwin and Solaris native support. If someone wants to >> resurrect it, it's all in CVS. >> >> c) Put off upgrading the auto* files until Cygwin and Solaris native >> build again and the upgrade can be tested. >> >> How do other folks feel? > >I vote for (a). I thought Corinna Vinschen was maintaining rda for cygwin. cgf