From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-63666-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 16377 invoked by alias); 11 May 2009 21:18:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 16366 invoked by uid 22791); 11 May 2009 21:18:39 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.4)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 11 May 2009 21:18:31 +0000
Received: (qmail 8286 invoked from network); 11 May 2009 21:18:29 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO orlando) (pedro@127.0.0.2)   by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 11 May 2009 21:18:29 -0000
From: Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>
To: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] i386/amd64 biarch gdbserver
Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 21:18:00 -0000
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org,  Doug Evans <dje@google.com>
References: <20090509191225.404D984890@localhost> <200905111850.46214.pedro@codesourcery.com> <20090511191642.GF14773@adacore.com>
In-Reply-To: <20090511191642.GF14773@adacore.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;   charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200905112218.33040.pedro@codesourcery.com>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2009-05/txt/msg00229.txt.bz2

On Monday 11 May 2009 20:16:42, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> > This looks good to me, but, I don't know how far can I stretch in
> > gdbserver approvals.
> 
> As far as I can tell, there are not that many active maintainers
> that work on gdbserver. It used to be mostly Daniel who approved
> patches. You're responsible for most of the changes this year,
> so I would personally say that you're one of the most qualified.

Thanks, though I'm not sure if that's such a good thing :-).

Doug, please go ahead with your patch.  Everyone else, please feel
free to hit me over head with a cluebat on proper ocasions.

-- 
Pedro Alves