remove dead links

diff --git a/resources.mdwn b/resources.mdwn
index dc7e66569000845ba0cef7a6a8310d9dd31fad3a..628e727971a2889bc6d9926ae0bb90e5c00a3103 100644 (file)
--- a/resources.mdwn
+++ b/resources.mdwn
@@ -366,7 +366,6 @@ Some learning resources I found in the community:
   <https://github.com/jfng/minerva-examples/blob/master/hello/core.py>
 * [Using our Python Unit Tests(old)](http://lists.libre-riscv.org/pipermail/libre-riscv-dev/2019-March/000705.html)
 * <https://chisel.eecs.berkeley.edu/api/latest/chisel3/util/DecoupledIO.html>
-* <http://www.clifford.at/papers/2016/yosys-synth-formal/slides.pdf>
 
 # Other
 

diff --git a/x-list.mdwn b/x-list.mdwn
index 174de2e68b3431062162cf83bc7814d39de7aabd..d108485f08a26809bc0e103a1ed06a4c840f5dad 100644 (file)
--- a/x-list.mdwn
+++ b/x-list.mdwn
@@ -326,7 +326,7 @@ guidelines and I believe they should be enforced:
 
 - https://riscv.org/risc-v-trademark-usage/
 
-Example 1:  https://emb-riscv.github.io/
+Example:  https://emb-riscv.github.io/
 
 Implementation proposal that does not comply with the minimal M mode
 requirements and may not be RISC-V compliant. The “Embedded RISC-V”
@@ -339,9 +339,6 @@ group and who is the chair? Using something like X-Embedded might be
 less risky assuming this may or may not be the Foundation’s official
 Embedded Working Group? It is hard to tell. It is suggestive.
 
-Example 2:
-https://github.com/cliffordwolf/xbitmanip/blob/master/xbitmanip-draft.pdf
-
 Uses X- prefix, extends the specifications, doesn’t modify the RISC-V
 logo. Clearly fair use.