Re: Get rid of underscore.c

[Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>]

Christian Jönsson <christian@j-son.org> writes:

| On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 12:00:55PM +0200, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
| > Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com> writes:
| > 
| > | Hi Jason,
| > | 
| > | > Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com> wrote:
| > | > 
| > | > But since it's never been much of a problem that both binutils and
| > | > gcc installed c++filt, I'd rather keep it in both.  So that, like DJ
| > | > says, if there is user confusion, we can always say `use the
| > | > latest'.
| > | 
| > | Jason - do you agree with this suggestion ?  I know that you feel that
| > | the binutils version does not really need to be there, but quite a few
| > | other people seem to like it.  Will it make your life unnecessarily
| > | difficult if we keep the two versions of the program and share the
| > | common code via libiberty ?
| > 
| > This is not meant to throw oil on the fire... but I feel like Jason,
| > I'm not convinced that there ought to be two versions of c++filt.
| > Each time, we duplicate things, we get back pains and confusions.  Is
| > it really that we do like pains and confusions?
| > 
| > -- Gaby
| 
| Is it really that hard to support cross-project interests? 

I don't think it is accurate to phrase the issue in terms of
non-supporting cross-project interests.

Actually, in the cross-project interests, I'm o fthe opinion that we
should minimize opportunities for pains and confusions.

-- Gaby