From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23643 invoked by alias); 2 Sep 2008 12:30:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 23634 invoked by uid 22791); 2 Sep 2008 12:30:55 -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; Tue, 02 Sep 2008 12:30:16 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1B5098417; Tue, 2 Sep 2008 12:30:13 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4C6D981E8; Tue, 2 Sep 2008 12:30:13 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KaV1Q-0005eh-GQ; Tue, 02 Sep 2008 08:30:12 -0400 Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 12:30:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Mark Kettenis Cc: uweigand@de.ibm.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [rfc][00/37] Eliminate builtin_type_ macros Message-ID: <20080902123012.GA21700@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Mark Kettenis , uweigand@de.ibm.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <200809011856.m81IufC2012091@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> <200809021020.m82AKiN8013408@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200809021020.m82AKiN8013408@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2008-05-11) 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: 2008-09/txt/msg00013.txt.bz2 On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 12:20:44PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote: > I don't think there is much you can do about it. A large set of > fairly mechanical changes is simply a large set of mechanical changes. > It's probably good if people have a look at part of the diff, but in > the end we'll just have to trust that the job was done properly and > that it gets committed (preferably after people have tested it). I agree. FWIW, I found this helpful - there was one problem in particular where I wanted to see Ulrich's solution, and I was able to find it easily :-) -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery