Re: Correction to last message, GC status

[Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>]

>>>>> "Hans" == Boehm, Hans <hans_boehm@hp.com> writes:

Hans> Is there an advantage to the "cvs shennanigans", as opposed to
Hans> just checking in what I have (with either a ChangeLog entry that
Hans> says 6.0alpha8 integration, or a more detailed one derived from
Hans> my README.changes)?

The advantage is that cvs will help us keep whatever local changes
there might be.  Also it will then be really easy to generate a patch,
using cvs, showing exactly what differs from your pristine release to
our HEAD.

Hans> Should I check in the standalone configure.in etc under a
Hans> different name?  Or should we just leave it out until we finish
Hans> unifying the two?

When I do imports I generally rename files like to the `foo.orig' and
then import.

Hans> Done.  There's a bunch of other "if 0" ed code already in the
Hans> file (probably also originally my doing).  I assume it should
Hans> also disappear?

Yes, please.

Thanks,
Tom