From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-14) on finch.gentoo.org X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.4 required=5.0 tests=DATE_IN_PAST_12_24,DMARC_QUAR, INVALID_DATE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0 Received: from arsenic.akopia.com ([204.242.142.104] helo=kabbu.akopia.com) by cvs.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #1) id 14UvY2-0001N6-00 for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 12:00:34 -0700 Received: by kabbu.akopia.com (Postfix, from userid 1020) id 891F39BFA0; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 14:00:58 -0500 (EST) From: Jerry A! To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] PGCC Message-ID: <20010219140058.A21535@kabbu.akopia.com> References: <20010219124314.A21137@kabbu.akopia.com> <3A915AB7.62757B5F@gottinger.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <3A915AB7.62757B5F@gottinger.de>; from 320095285153-0001@t-online.de on Mon, Feb 19, 2001 at 06:41:11PM +0100 Organization: Broken Toys Unlimited Sender: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org Errors-To: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org X-Reply-To: jerry@thehutt.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Gentoo Linux development list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Mon Feb 19 12:01:02 2001 X-Original-Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 14:00:58 -0500 X-Archives-Salt: 009fe390-d43f-415b-8b52-418c858e6612 X-Archives-Hash: 5a21115131faba5514dd3183350f0f9f On Mon, Feb 19, 2001 at 06:41:11PM +0100, Achim Gottinger wrote: : "Jerry A!" wrote: : : > . commented out A1..A2 patches sections in src_unpack(). Will also be : > removed pending commit. : : Make these patches problems with pgcc? I removed a few other patches which : made it in 2.95.2.1 but these : where not in 2.95.2.1. Thats why they are still there. I don't think that these patches will present a problem with pgcc. The reason I commented them out was b/c they didn't even get downloaded when I did an "ebuild ... fetch" : > Is there any reason we don't build the texinfo docs? : : ? We build texinfo docs but we don't build texinfo because we have a separate : package for that. Okay, that's all I needed to know. : I just commited my lates version of gcc 2.95.2.1-r1 which uses the "use : build" if you compile for sys-build : (in this case texinfo gets build). : Should I merge it with your one or can you do it? I'll be happy to take care of the merge. I want to do some more testing and I wanted to make sure that the way I was going about this is okay with you. --Jerry name: Jerry Alexandratos || Open-Source software isn't a phone: 703.599.6023 || matter of life or death... email: jerry@thehutt.org || ...It's much more important || than that!