From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21736 invoked by alias); 12 Dec 2002 04:31:51 -0000 Mailing-List: contact rhug-rhats-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: rhug-rhats-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 21611 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2002 04:31:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 12 Dec 2002 04:31:50 -0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (nat-pool-rdu-dmz.redhat.com [172.16.52.200]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gBC468P15244 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 23:06:09 -0500 Received: from potter.sfbay.redhat.com (potter.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.15]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gBC4Vms19398; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 23:31:49 -0500 Received: from [10.2.210.123] (vpn50-16.rdu.redhat.com [172.16.50.16]) by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gBC4Vl720200; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 20:31:48 -0800 Subject: Re: BCEL question From: Anthony Green To: Tom Tromey Cc: rhug-rhats@sources.redhat.com In-Reply-To: <873cp4hzyk.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> References: <873cp4hzyk.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 20:31:00 -0000 Message-Id: <1039667582.2883.59.camel@escape> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2002-12/txt/msg00008.txt.bz2 On Wed, 2002-12-11 at 15:56, Tom Tromey wrote: > What is the usual approach here? > Find a new BCEL and see if it is fixed? I think BCEL was just upgraded by Gary. Does a newer version exist? > Fix BCEL in the rhug tree? Don't hesitate to patch rhug. It contains a number of work-arounds already. AG