From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Ja9VU-0004D5-E3
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 08:59:32 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Ja9VS-0004Ch-PE
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 08:59:32 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ja9VS-0004Ce-Ke
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 08:59:30 -0400
Received: from hobi.com ([130.94.185.247])
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <rickv@hobi.com>) id 1Ja9VS-0006Sr-4S
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 08:59:30 -0400
Received: from unknown (HELO ricklap) ([68.255.103.159])
	(envelope-sender <rickv@hobi.com>)
	by 130.94.185.247 (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; 14 Mar 2008 12:58:08 -0000
From: Rick Vernam <rickv@hobi.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] CVS build error
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 07:59:28 -0500
References: <200803131533.46989.rickv@hobi.com>
	<alpine.LSU.1.00.0803141149300.24600@racer.site>
	<6030C723-F4C5-4801-A003-F154D5246AFF@web.de>
In-Reply-To: <6030C723-F4C5-4801-A003-F154D5246AFF@web.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200803140759.28490.rickv@hobi.com>
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Friday 14 March 2008 06:07:37 am Andreas F=E4rber wrote:
> > So I absolutely _fail_ to understand what you thought, implying that =A0
> > I was
> > restricting platform variability.
>
> So in fact you do agree with Rick on that part and replied to the =A0
> 'wrong' message, creating minor confusion: In your own quote, he =A0
> opposes the proposal to "make configure fail horribly". ;-)

okay, good, so it's not just me :-)
And it is necessary to have configure require a special step to build with=
=20
gcc4 anyway.

I never suggested changing anything.  just trying to learn a thing or two=20
here.

Sheesh is right, indeed.