think this is a good idea. We have some items on there that are years
old, and it would be good to even update the requested date on them so
that people know the requests are still valid.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo
why we want to
try and change that to something else, even if that was what it was
supposed to mean to begin with.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web - http
Daniel Goller [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Mark Loeser wrote:
Here is the newest revision of my proposal. Not much has changed, but I
added and changed some small things. Constructive feedback is
appreciated. I'd like to get this voted on by the council at the next
meeting.
* The QA
Mark Loeser [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Daniel Goller [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Mark Loeser wrote:
Here is the newest revision of my proposal. Not much has changed, but I
added and changed some small things. Constructive feedback is
appreciated. I'd like to get this voted
, it is just the
wording that threw you off :) I mean that it can never be complete, so
don't think it ever is.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web - http
Duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Mark Loeser posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted
below, on Mon, 24 Apr 2006 09:11:28 -0400:
* QA will take an active role in cleaning up unmaintained and broken
packages from the tree. It is also encouraged of members of the QA
team to assist
And now in GLEP format for those who like that sort of thing :)
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0048.html
I made the two wording changes so it is more clear what I wanted to
communicate.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n
.
* QA will take an active role in cleaning up unmaintained and broken
packages from the tree. It is also encouraged of members of the QA team to
assist in mentoring new developers that wish to take over unmaintained
packages/herds.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa
to claim responsibility for the package when there
is a problem.
Just my 2 cents,
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web - http://dev.gentoo.org/~halcy0n
dev-util/ is not depended on by any other applications, the stable
version does not compile, and while upstream has newer releases which most
likely work...there is no Gentoo maintainer (bug #128109). If no one steps
up to maintain it in 30 days, I will be removing it.
--
Mark Loeser
There has been no upstream release in years, and the download URLs no
longer work. It also has some open bugs (bug #127131). If anyone
wishes to step up and maintain this, please do so within the next 30
days, or I am removing it from the tree.
Thanks,
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer
really seems to know how we worked, and were surprised that we
are entirely volunteer based and don't get paid. They seemed to respect
us even more once they heard about that. The people that walked up to us
and just told us, You guys rock! were awesome too :)
Just my two cents, :)
--
Mark Loeser
... Things should only go to the council when all other methods
fail, and they are the only ones you can appeal to.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web - http
/whatever policy. Lets keep that out of a document like
this and decide on that through the appropriate channels.
If those last two paragraphs are cut, I'm quite happy with it, even if
it isn't all true right now, and is something we should strive towards
doing.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer
Carsten Lohrke [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Thursday 30 March 2006 01:55, Mark Loeser wrote:
Not directed specifically at you, but it seems a lot of people are
masking stuff and removing it very quickly, and I'd really like to see
everyone wait the 30 days to remove something from the tree
should be
removed so quickly?
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web - http://dev.gentoo.org/~halcy0n/
http://www.halcy0n.com
pgpzdTXfIbhxx.pgp
it in 30 days.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web - http://dev.gentoo.org/~halcy0n/
http://www.halcy0n.com
pgpRW5G91lZr8.pgp
Description
saying we need someone to
maintain them, and see what happens. You can put me down as the contact on
the staffing-needs page if you want. I hate to see things that are useful
to our users taken from the tree, but there isn't much we can do when
there is no one to maintain them.
--
Mark Loeser
the build/deptree phase and more
warnings/information to be presented so the user could look at it and
make changes, or just accept what we have done for them.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
mark
of the packages if no maintainer can be found
to step up. So, is anyone willing to do so?
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web - http://dev.gentoo.org/~halcy0n
the QA team and
the maintainer. In situations where we can't figure out how to best
address the situation, opening the discussion up to -dev may help, but
in the end it should come down to an agreement between the maintainer
and the team.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa
we would like to see fixed.
They are there to make readability across ebuilds easier since
everything will be formatted the same way for a developer to see.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
mark
is saying that we shouldn't fix things to
adhere to coding standards. We are just saying it is not a, OMG you
broke it! problem. It is about appropriate responses to the problems
we encounter.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo
about your original draft:
I never said it was different. I said I added some things based on
feedback I got. As I said in the last thread, I disagree with many of
the things you have come up with. You are free to try and convince me
otherwise.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc
a better solution
somewhere in the long-term.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web - http://dev.gentoo.org/~halcy0n/
http://www.halcy0n.com
all of the debate out of the way now.
Please lets keep the discussion on topic and constructive.
Thanks,
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web - http
Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Mark Loeser wrote:
Here is my updated version after some feedback from people:
* In the case of disagreement on policy among QA members, the majority
of established QA members must agree with the action.
What is an Established QA member?
Listed
the perfect solution right away and
that flexibility is required.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web - http://dev.gentoo.org/~halcy0n/
http
involved
every single time someone has a disagreement. This situation has
obviously grown to be ridiculous and I have had a talk with him about
it, so he knows my feelings on the situation, and what I expect.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86)
email
everything fixed up that we can.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web - http://dev.gentoo.org/~halcy0n/
http://www.halcy0n.com
, not that I expect QA team
members to behave that way.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web - http://dev.gentoo.org/~halcy0n/
http://www.halcy0n.com
Grant Goodyear [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Mark Loeser wrote:
* In case of emergency, or if package maintainers refuse to cooperate,
the QA team may take action themselves to fix the problem.
My suspicion is that the more common problem is going to be inaccessible
developers, rather than
will be presented with this request to
devrel.
* The QA team will maintain a list of current QA Standards. The list
is not meant by any means to be a comprehensive document, but rather a
dynamic document that will be updated as new problems are discovered.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp
to the
council about one of our changes. Also, we aren't unwilling to hear
alternatives and we hope to work with the maintainer on these problems.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
mark AT halcy0n
prove to be impossible.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web - http://dev.gentoo.org/~halcy0n/
http://www.halcy0n.com
pgpL6u3xmZeKv.pgp
Stuart Herbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Sun, 2006-02-26 at 17:22 -0500, Mark Loeser wrote:
* In case of emergency, or if package maintainers refuse to cooperate,
the QA team may take action themselves to fix the problem.
I'd like to see this say
* In case of emergency, or after
Donnie Berkholz [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Mark Loeser wrote:
Well, instead of putting the debate into an even larger crowd, this
enables the QA team to act in the way it sees best first. If people
believe we were wrong, then we give them the option to talk to the
council about one of our
Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 17:22:17 -0500 Mark Loeser [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| * The QA team will maintain a list of current QA Standards. The
| list is not meant by any means to be a comprehensive document, but
| rather a dynamic document
.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web - http://dev.gentoo.org/~halcy0n/
http://www.halcy0n.com
pgp8iRpskxJ5q.pgp
Description: PGP signature
The package has been in package.mask since July 2002. Upstream appears dead.
If no one objects, I will drop it from the tree in a week (since it has
already been masked for years anyway :) ).
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n
it be acceptable?
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web - http://dev.gentoo.org/~halcy0n/
http://www.halcy0n.com
pgpmrmdUiVjvE.pgp
Description: PGP
, we should decide if this is valid though. I haven't
exactly been convinced that it is useful, but I'm not opposed to the idea.
I'd just like to see a decision one way or another.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
out for?
I don't see this as a groundbreaking change that requires a GLEP or anything,
especially since I eliminated most of the duplicates today, after talking
with the respective maintainers. There are probably only 3 or 4 left.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa
R Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Anyways I just like anything that makes use.desc more useful than
foo - adds support for foo
That's really a completely separate issue. By allowing duplicate entries we
just allow people to put useless information in two places instead of one.
--
Mark Loeser
it.
Thanks,
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web - http://dev.gentoo.org/~halcy0n/
http://www.halcy0n.com
pgpdH6MEmUfuw.pgp
Description: PGP signature
gcc-3.3 or libstdc++-v3. I don't see forcing either upon our
users to be a good thing. The upgrade doc covers how to do the 3.3-3.4
upgrade, and I think most archs are on 3.4 at this point.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo
Jason Stubbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Thursday 09 February 2006 09:30, Mark Loeser wrote:
Jason Stubbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
It was my understanding that it is needed for the 3.3 - 3.4 upgrade.
Various packages that will build fine against either are broken until
being recompiled
open about this
package right now, and having an error about deps in some old version doesn't
really help arch teams at all.
I am all for getting stuff ported, but making things harder for arch teams is
not the way to go about it.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting toolchain
Jason Stubbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Wednesday 01 February 2006 02:28, Mark Loeser wrote:
We are talking about completely unrelated versions, not what we are
touching.
For example, old imagemagick ebuilds sitting around, where the newer ebuilds
are fixed, but old ones are not. We
? It makes things a pain for arch
teams that are trying to mark a completely unrelated version of the package.
Thanks,
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web - http
. Knowing that 800 packages are broken, and going to unmask it
knowing that just doesn't seem acceptable in my eyes. ~arch isn't meant to
be things are known to be broken. It's meant to mean, we think all of this
is ready to be stable, which it certainly won't be in this case.
Thanks,
--
Mark
, but we can wait
until its down to a more reasonable value. This huge push to get everything
ported over only started recently, and I think we need more time.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
mark
that debugging almost works for hardened users too.
Please lets avoid this assumption. I'd love to make it so we never make this
assumption anywhere in the tree so that we could actually build GCC without
pie or ssp, instead of generating all of the GCC profiles for every user.
--
Mark Loeser
to either make repoman not complain if HOMEPAGE= is supposed
to be valid, or put none in there if necessary.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web - http://dev.gentoo.org
projects are active and reporting information on their status.
Sounds good as well. I'd like to see all of the projects/teams saying what
their goals are, or what they have done to move towards their goals.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting toolchain x86)
email
Lance Albertson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Mark Loeser wrote:
Chris Gianelloni [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
I completely agree with you here. What Gentoo does is make a
meta-distribution, that one can utilize to build their own distribution
easily. This isn't limited to Linux, either, thanks
like to know of everything that
is broken.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web - http://dev.gentoo.org/~halcy0n/
http://www.halcy0n.com
please, its much easier.
I'm wondering if a gcc4 tracker bug might help as Mark was planning to move it
in ~arch.
Sounds like a good idea. I'll probably make one in a bit if someone doesn't
beat me to it.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting toolchain x86)
email
Bjarke Istrup Pedersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Does this mean that gcc-3.4 will no longer have libstdc++ as a
dependency? :-D
That is what I hope to accomplish, yes.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
Mark Loeser [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Mark Loeser [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
So, everyone that has a binary package in the tree, I would appreciate it if
you could put the sys-libs/libstdc++-v3 depend into your package if
necessary.
Well, you can tell I didn't exactly think about this too
.
Betelgeuse is working on a repoman check for this issue, meanwhile, if there
are more virtuals planned, please bear this in mind. :)
It makes no sense to make a check to verify what seems to be broken
behaviour. The virtuals should be like any other ebuild in the tree.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo
::Tk, placed on CPAN, similar to
perl/Tk, small and easy.
I'll do all needed work myself.
Could you please advice whom to contact? Where is FAQ for me to read?
File a bug about this as well :)
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n
#116253 was invalid due to the user's package.keywords.
Thanks,
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web - http://dev.gentoo.org/~halcy0n/
http
the sys-libs/libstdc++-v3 depend into your package if
necessary.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web - http://dev.gentoo.org/~halcy0n/
http
Mark Loeser [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
So, everyone that has a binary package in the tree, I would appreciate it if
you could put the sys-libs/libstdc++-v3 depend into your package if
necessary.
Well, you can tell I didn't exactly think about this too much beforehand,
since its been brought to my
or such set correctly, you will be able to easily sort. Adding
additional headers to the emails is really trivial if we need something else
to make our lives easier.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
. This should be added to existing documentation
policy so it is somewhere for new devs to know about, and existing devs to
have for a reference.
Thanks
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
mark AT halcy0n
deemed stable.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web - http://dev.gentoo.org/~halcy0n/
http://www.halcy0n.com
pgpqnl9LWsDn7.pgp
Description: PGP
personally. The issues listed don't seem
to warrant that.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web - http://dev.gentoo.org/~halcy0n/
http
Mike Frysinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 08:02:27PM -0500, Mark Loeser wrote:
You are working on a policy, or just docs to explain the issues?
documentation on PIC/TEXTRELs/etc...
the policy i consider a no-brainer, fix TEXTRELs
By policy, I mean things to add
.
Yea, we need to know what is absolutely critical so we can add this to the
ebuild policy if something should not go stable if the problem is present.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
mark AT halcy0n
for it to get all of the mirrors, which will take a bit
longer after that.
[1] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/base/x86/gcc-upgrading-guide.xml
[2] https://bugs.gentoo.org
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
Mark Loeser [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Only thing I see
as lacking is we might want to get a doc together on how to properly upgrade
your toolchain so we don't get an influx of bugs from users that have a
system half compiled with 3.3 and the other half with 3.4 so they get linking
errors
after merging it. The
old gcc profile is still valid, therefore it is kept. Users have to
consciously go and change their profile to change their gcc, so nothing is
going to just magically break.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n
at.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web - http://dev.gentoo.org/~halcy0n/
http://www.halcy0n.com
pgpzZTFpcaErN.pgp
Description: PGP signature
://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102876
I'm hoping we can get something thrown together relatively quickly so I can
mark it stable. Nothing is going to be required immediately from the user
though, since their compiler won't be changed to 3.4 until they do so.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc
64615.
Yea, I updated my statement on the bug to reflect this. C++ stuff should be
the only thing affected, so this _should_ be enough. Its also already
something that's been in the ebuild for a while now.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting toolchain x86)
email
.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting toolchain x86)
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web - http://dev.gentoo.org/~halcy0n/
http://www.halcy0n.com
pgpgktGju3Vxt.pgp
Description: PGP signature
This is basically a heads-up email to everyone to say that we are probably
going to be moving gcc-3.4.4-r1 to stable on x86 very soon. If any of the
archs that have already done the move from having 3.3 stable to 3.4 could
give us a heads up on what to expect, that would be great. Only thing I
, libstdc++-v3 should be pulled in
after that. Only issue I really see is people that have libraries compiled
with 3.3 and 3.4 and don't know why stuff is broken. I don't know how large
of a problem that will be though.
--
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting toolchain x86)
email
Ned Ludd [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
I really can't give an accurate example. Halcyon who has been testing it
merged world and he was yeilded with 18M of debug info (I have no idea
how many packages he has).
Just for the sake of reference, this was with 95 packages and CFLAGS=-O2
-march=pentium4
If no one steps up to maintain it, luabind will be removed from the tree in 2
weeks. It has not had an upstream release since 2003 and is broken with
newer versions of boost, =1.32. Nothing in the tree deps on it, so there
shouldn't be any problems with its removal.
Thanks,
Mark
Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
You can do whatever you like. Nobody is forcing you to do anything.
That being said, you are not going to force *me* to do anything, either.
Hmm, have I missed an argument here? Actually, the above is incorrect. You
*are* forcing me to use stage3, but
Simon Strandman wrote:
I'm curious why --as-needed is disabled for glibc builds. It was first
added over a year ago in one of the early 2.3.4 builds so is it still
nessecary?
I tried removing it and had no problems building glibc and I could see
that it was used when looking at the compile
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 22 Sep 2005 18:36:18 -0400 Mark Loeser [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| I'm sending this email because I have seen some packages marked stable
| on x86 without the permission of the x86 team, and would like the
| people who can mark stable for x86 to contact us
Paul de Vrieze wrote:
I think that dev-util is a very specific category containing development
utilities of some sort. There might be some misclassifications in them,
but from a user perspective I don't really care about the language
anything is written in. As C++ is so widespread I don't
I'm masking app-arch/gzip-x86 as we speak. It seems to cause problems
for people[1] and is based off of gzip-1.3.3. As such, it is vulnerable
to a couple[2] exploits[3]. Upstream appears dead (last update was
2003-05-20) and no one is currently maintaining it for us. If you don't
want to see it
Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
I would also like to see many of them, if not all, moved to the dev-cpp
category:
Is this bit really necessary?
The reason for me adding that bit is the metadata from dev-cpp:
The dev-cpp category contains libraries and utilities relevant to the
c++ programming
Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Saturday 17 September 2005 02:22 pm, Mark Loeser wrote:
The reason for me adding that bit is the metadata from dev-cpp:
The dev-cpp category contains libraries and utilities relevant to the
c++ programming language.
Now to me, that means I can find *all* relevant C
Since we currently have language herds for other languages such as Ada,
Perl, and Java, I don't think C++ should be any different. There are
currently many packages in the tree that are C++ libraries or utilities
that are no-herd and are actively maintained, and there are probably
some that have
101 - 190 of 190 matches
Mail list logo
