Re: Patch : gdbserver get_image_name on CE

[Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>]

On Sunday 07 June 2009 20:12:47, Danny Backx wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-06-07 at 19:16 +0100, Pedro Alves wrote:
> > It's fine to send unfinished patches for comments, if you'd like, but
> > please say so explicitly, so I don't waste time trying to understand
> > what they're for, for nothing.
> 
> This one isn't for nothing, it fixes a problem. 

Sorry, you missed my point.  "for nothing" refered to my waste of time,
not to the usefulness of the patch.  Please do realize that if you don't
explain what the patch does, than whoever reviews it has to stare
at the code and try to make some sense of it.  If the patch
isn't obvious (this one isn't obvious to me), and doesn't
come with explanations, it is not going to be applied.  The onus
is on you to make it as easy as possible for a reviewer/maintainer to
accept a patch.  I really do not mean to sound harsh.  It is just
that it is easy to not realise that it does take time to review
a patch, and the backlog isn't getting shorter...

> It's just not all of the 
> work to get gdb/gdbserver to work for x86/ce .

I understand.

On Sunday 07 June 2009 20:12:47, Danny Backx wrote:
> CE -> unicode, both ARM and x86.
> The DLL name was in the right place, it's just the code to read it
> didn't work right.

It's the explanation of what's wrong with it that's missing.

-- 
Pedro Alves