From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31006 invoked by alias); 22 Jun 2009 20:56:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 30998 invoked by uid 22791); 22 Jun 2009 20:56:29 -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; Mon, 22 Jun 2009 20:56:22 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 813E92BAAF2; Mon, 22 Jun 2009 16:56:20 -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 xRXnPpdQbZ-E; Mon, 22 Jun 2009 16:56:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4912F2BAAE0; Mon, 22 Jun 2009 16:56:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 4B6EBF596C; Mon, 22 Jun 2009 13:56:16 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 20:56:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Pierre Muller Cc: 'Eli Zaretskii' , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PING][RFA-v2] Fix a windows bug if two watchpoints are used Message-ID: <20090622205616.GD7766@adacore.com> References: <000601c9e4a3$b2f2f980$18d8ec80$@u-strasbg.fr> <000001c9e4de$6e550cb0$4aff2610$@u-strasbg.fr> <000301c9e4e6$b40c5d50$1c2517f0$@u-strasbg.fr> <001501c9e523$feffc1c0$fcff4540$@u-strasbg.fr> <000301c9eed3$c7239d80$556ad880$@u-strasbg.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <000301c9eed3$c7239d80$556ad880$@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: 2009-06/txt/msg00589.txt.bz2 > Here also, I don't know if there still is an official > maintainer for i386-nat.c code, or is > Eli's approval enough for this? Eli is a Global Maintainer, so his approval is as good as any one else. I'm not sure that Eli's message was meant as an actual approval, though, so you might want to double-check with him. -- Joel