From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21453 invoked by alias); 8 Dec 2008 19:06:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 21439 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Dec 2008 19:06:13 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 08 Dec 2008 19:05:38 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EC662A9680; Mon, 8 Dec 2008 14:05:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 5z-bNac1DWJQ; Mon, 8 Dec 2008 14:05:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43D462A967C; Mon, 8 Dec 2008 14:05:36 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 6F53DE7ACD; Mon, 8 Dec 2008 20:05:34 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2008 19:06:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Mark Kettenis Cc: gingold@adacore.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFA] Darwin: single step through sigreturn Message-ID: <20081208190534.GG3823@adacore.com> References: <200812042228.mB4MSIcl009759@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <75F20677-9F36-4769-AB34-7D3D41BF5E94@adacore.com> <20081208174805.GF3823@adacore.com> <200812081813.mB8IDKrf016619@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200812081813.mB8IDKrf016619@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i 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: 2008-12/txt/msg00156.txt.bz2 > Not really. Some MIME implementations do horrible things to diffs. I'm really surprised. We had at least one instances in the past where the diff was molested and thus impossible to apply (we asked the contributor to fix, and he eventually did - not sure if he was using an attachement or not, though). But otherwise, things have been working fine. And I was always under the impression that the chances of having the diff be molested was MUCH higher when sent inline. Maybe I'm wrong... > I'm probably fighting a losing battle here, but the preferred way to > send diffs is inline, using a sane mail client that doesn't add any > formatting of its own. I'm afraid you are right - I fought similar battles in the past and lost them too... -- Joel