-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday 30 May 2001 09:43, Thiemo Seufer wrote: > Ilya Volynets wrote: > [snip] > >Now, one of the reasons for this is that maintainers of some important > >tools (like gcc :-) are little bit too concentrated on Inhell architecture. > >They do not apply our patches, they do not fix bugs reported by us, > > I don't know about gcc, but with binutils I haven't such problems > so far. That's why I didn't mention them. GCC is my primary concern now. > Which of Your patches were rejected (and for what reason)? I'm not talking about myself, but if you mention it to Keith, for example, you'll hear a lot of loud sound :). In general I think collecting stuff that floats around into one central place will be useful. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iEYEARECAAYFAjsVL+0ACgkQtKh84cA8u2lAKgCfXYgHdrJ3APYKr8vuZhAFQ9N7 fDMAoNv5rpUtkE5iZ1wMqCTjVGjjdbyR =gik0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
