From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12424 invoked by alias); 11 Oct 2007 13:54:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 12414 invoked by uid 22791); 11 Oct 2007 13:54:25 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 13:54:21 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CE4C981F3; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 13:54:20 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9E11981F2; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 13:54:19 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1IfyUU-0004IC-Hi; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 09:54:18 -0400 Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2007 14:20:00 -0000 From: 'Daniel Jacobowitz' To: Pierre Muller Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Update ARI pages Message-ID: <20071011135418.GA16191@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Pierre Muller , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <000001c80b14$db947450$92bd5cf0$@u-strasbg.fr> <20071010120140.GB10228@caradoc.them.org> <002301c80bd8$051fc9f0$0f5f5dd0$@u-strasbg.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <002301c80bd8$051fc9f0$0f5f5dd0$@u-strasbg.fr> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15 (2007-04-09) 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: 2007-10/txt/msg00282.txt.bz2 On Thu, Oct 11, 2007 at 09:26:20AM +0200, Pierre Muller wrote: > Strange, because the ARI from today still do not > reflect the changes :( > The gdb_ari.sh still contains the old 'strerror' rule > for which the implementation should be in gdb/utils.c file. > Maybe the files executing every night are not automatically > synchronized with the cvs repository. Right, I forgot to update the master copy. > It might also be a good time (as 6.7 just came out) > to refresh the 'last release' page, but, to be honest, I don't even think this is worth doing. Does anyone else? The ARI is a development tool; it's not important for release branches. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery