From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10194 invoked by alias); 29 Mar 2007 21:03:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 10179 invoked by uid 22791); 29 Mar 2007 21:03:55 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from return.false.org (HELO return.false.org) (66.207.162.98) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 29 Mar 2007 22:03:53 +0100 Received: from return.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by return.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3B524B26D for ; Thu, 29 Mar 2007 16:03:51 -0500 (CDT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (dsl093-172-095.pit1.dsl.speakeasy.net [66.93.172.95]) by return.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACF774B267 for ; Thu, 29 Mar 2007 16:03:51 -0500 (CDT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1HX1mh-0008FI-1u for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Thu, 29 Mar 2007 17:03:51 -0400 Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 21:03:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFA/libiberty] Enhance FILENAME_CMP for Windows filesystems Message-ID: <20070329210350.GA31656@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20070328191845.GB3956@adacore.com> <200703281930.l2SJUYLW003949@greed.delorie.com> <20070328193743.GC3956@adacore.com> <20070328202443.GD3956@adacore.com> <200703282043.l2SKhnS7005336@greed.delorie.com> <20070329205740.GD3737@adacore.com> <20070329210314.GE3737@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070329210314.GE3737@adacore.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.14+cvs20070313 (2007-03-13) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-03/txt/msg00332.txt.bz2 On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 02:03:14PM -0700, Joel Brobecker wrote: > > > Ok. > > > > Thank you. I just checked everything in. > > I checked the change in gcc, but are these checkins propagated to GDB > as well? It doesn't seem like it. > > How do we handle synchronization with libiberty changes? Manually; please commit it to src too. Thanks for fixing this, by the way. We had a similar patch in our queue of things to post... -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery