Re: bug-binutils@gnu.org

[Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp at bitrange dot com>]

On Fri, 31 Oct 2003, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 31, 2003 at 10:38:11PM -0500, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> >On Fri, 31 Oct 2003, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >> On Fri, Oct 31, 2003 at 04:14:41PM -0500, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> >> >On Fri, 31 Oct 2003, Nick Clifton wrote:
> >> >> > My cvs build from a few days ago has bug-binutils@gnu.org listed as
> >> >> > the bug reporting address.  If bug-binutils@gnu.org is no longer the
> >> >> > working contact address listed for the tools, could a change to the
> >> >> > replacement address be made?
> >> >>
> >> >> This is a delicate issue, because the FSF insists that the
> >> >> bug-binutils address be the official bug reporting address.
> >> >
> >> >IIRC bug-binutils just forwards to bug-gnu-utils, one way or
> >> >another.  Perhaps it is simple to make it forward to
> >
> >By "it" (forward) I mean forwarding bug-binutils, not
> >bug-gnu-utils.
> >
> >Does that change your comments?  If not, read on.
> >
> >> >binutils@sources.redhat.com?  Or to binutils@sourceware.org if
> >> >the vendor name is an issue?
> >>
> >> I don't see how that would be extremely useful since replies would end
> >> up here and not in bug-gnu-utils.
> >
> >(Why should bug-binutils answers better go to bug-gnu-utils
> >rather than here?)
> >
> >>  Also, the non-binutils email wouldn't
> >> really be appropriate here.
> >
> >(I was referring to bug-binutils, so I think there'd only be
> >binutils-email. ;-)
>
> The only way I know of to link the two lists is to subscribe binutils
> sources redhat com to bug-gnu-utils since there is no actual
> bug-binutils list.

We know that by now, and that's what I referred to by
"bug-binutils just forwards to bug-gnu-utils, one way or
another".  It doesn't have to *remain* like this though.

I think I somehow lost you with my reply, so I'll try other
words: because there is no real bug-binutils list and it's just
an alias, it could just be an alias for *this list* rather than
for bug-gnu-utils.  Let's please lose the bug-gnu-utils
connection completely.

>  I suppose you could get a gnu.org sysadmin to
> forward only the bug-binutils mail here

Hoping for that to be the one and only outcome, yes.

> but it seems like you'd trip
> over the same political problems that always come from trying to use
> this site.

The alternative at hand seems to be to continue to ignore the
for all existing releases advertised bug-report-address for
binutils.  Note also the suggestion above about using the name
binutils a t sourware.org when forwarding.

Anyway, something political is bound to come out of this since
Nick's post.

>  And, as I said, there is no guarantee that a reply to
> a message in binutils would go back to bug-binutils.

If it's changed to be just an alias for this list, there's no
need to keep anything separate, and "messages going back" has no
meaning, right?

brgds, H-P