From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2861 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2005 21:26:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 2853 invoked by uid 22791); 25 Nov 2005 21:26:24 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from sibelius.xs4all.nl (HELO sibelius.xs4all.nl) (82.92.89.47) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 25 Nov 2005 21:26:23 +0000 Received: from elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (root@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl [192.168.0.2]) by sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id jAPLPd0c020290; Fri, 25 Nov 2005 22:25:39 +0100 (CET) Received: from elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (kettenis@localhost.sibelius.xs4all.nl [127.0.0.1]) by elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.4/8.13.3) with ESMTP id jAPLPdPS014360; Fri, 25 Nov 2005 22:25:39 +0100 (CET) Received: (from kettenis@localhost) by elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id jAPLPcci028887; Fri, 25 Nov 2005 22:25:38 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 23:00:00 -0000 Message-Id: <200511252125.jAPLPcci028887@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> From: Mark Kettenis To: frederic.riss@st.com, brobecker@adacore.com CC: mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl, jimb@red-bean.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <1132913972.13035.12.camel@crx549.cro.st.com> (message from Frederic RISS on Fri, 25 Nov 2005 11:19:32 +0100) Subject: Re: [RFC] DW_CFA_restore handling causes memory fault References: <1132242850.8685.47.camel@crx549.cro.st.com> <8f2776cb0511171132x17fa4192u6ca5af71201e0be3@mail.gmail.com> <1132301881.8685.63.camel@crx549.cro.st.com> <8f2776cb0511180035ndadf290ta81520f75cf601d5@mail.gmail.com> <1132317183.8685.101.camel@crx549.cro.st.com> <200511181345.jAIDjZNc026609@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <1132738531.7340.42.camel@crx549.cro.st.com> <200511242248.jAOMmCfC031451@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <1132913972.13035.12.camel@crx549.cro.st.com> Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2005-11/txt/msg00473.txt.bz2 > From: Frederic RISS > Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 11:19:32 +0100 > > On Thu, 2005-11-24 at 23:48 +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote: > > Sorry to be such a prick, but could you change the message > [...] > > I think that's less confusing. With that change you've got my ok. > > Well I'm sorry that you have to rewrite my patch yourself :-) No problem, I was feeling a bit guilty about not thinking about this in the first place. > I commited the attached patch containing your message to HEAD. Should > that go to the 6.4 branch also ? BTW, what's the policy for patches > being approved during the release process, do they have implicit > approval for HEAD and the branch or does the latter require explicit > approval ? I'm not sure the branch is still open, but yes I think this should go into 6.4 or 6.4.1. Joel?