Re: [Mon-devel] Desire to upgrade Mon, which one?

[Jim T. <tr...@tr...>]

On Mon, 14 Feb 2005, David Nolan wrote:

>
>
> --On Friday, February 11, 2005 8:52 PM -0500 Ed Ravin <er...@pa...> 
> wrote:
>
>
>> Is there any chance the anti-gas fork code will be brought into 1.0?
>> If not, is the code currently in the CVS head usable?  Any reason
>> why 1.1 isn't tagged yet or 1.0 not released yet?
>> 
>> 	-- Ed
>
> Ed,
>
> About a week ago I asked on the list, and in email to Jim, if he had any 
> objections to my tagging the HEAD as 1.1.0pre1.  I got no response, so I 
> guess I'll assume he has no objections.  I've tagged the current CVS head as 
> mon-1-1-0pre1.  I did not tag mon-client, as there are no changes from the 
> 1.0 version.

sorry, you're correct, no objection to that tag. one thing i need to do is port
a change i did in a recent -devel which makes a unified routine for handling
both failures and traps (called "process_event"), and significantly simplifying
the handling of both by removing lots of redundant code. it also made me
feel better :)