From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28076 invoked by alias); 6 May 2009 16:31:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 28030 invoked by uid 22791); 6 May 2009 16:31:03 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 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; Wed, 06 May 2009 16:30:56 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E085A2BAB33; Wed, 6 May 2009 12:30:54 -0400 (EDT) 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 mHCTw-511gr4; Wed, 6 May 2009 12:30:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41FCF2BAB27; Wed, 6 May 2009 12:30:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 84DC8F5900; Wed, 6 May 2009 09:30:51 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 06 May 2009 16:31:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Pierre Muller Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Send new ARI warnings to gdb_testers mailing list Message-ID: <20090506163051.GL10734@adacore.com> References: <001801c9c397$0e35ba90$2aa12fb0$@u-strasbg.fr> <20090423184213.GE7552@adacore.com> <013401c9ca3e$852e58c0$8f8b0a40$@u-strasbg.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <013401c9ca3e$852e58c0$8f8b0a40$@u-strasbg.fr> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) 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: 2009-05/txt/msg00119.txt.bz2 > The only drawback is that the line number also does not appear > on the generated email... Initially, I thought that this was a pretty significant drawback. But I tried to come up with a way of isolating the new line, and I'm not sure whether this is possible or not. The problem is that the line number associated to an error/warning can change from day to day, as we modify the source around it. We could try your current approach, and see if that helps or not... Why not activating your change, but with yourself as the the only recipient, as opposed to gdb-testers? That will allow you to determine the frequency of such messages, as we as how difficult it is to determine which entry is the new one... -- Joel