On 14 Jul 2012, at 00:21, Mike Stump wrote: > On Jul 13, 2012, at 12:28 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote: >> On 11 Jul 2012, at 00:01, Iain Sandoe wrote: >>> Anyway, although i686-Darwin 8 is sadly in need of some TLC, the proposed >>> patch causes no regressions. >>> ppc-darwin 8 tests are still running, but it bootstrapped (500M G4, > 24hrs >>> for c/c++ build & test). >> >> FAOD, from a testing perspective this is fine - but it needs Mike's OK, > > Hum, no, it doesn't, it has already been approved by Paolo, and I don't > disagree with that approval.... :-)
apologies, I missed a post.
