From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20259 invoked by alias); 1 Oct 2009 22:04:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 20245 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Oct 2009 22:04:40 -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; Thu, 01 Oct 2009 22:04:35 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14A2C2BAB25; Thu, 1 Oct 2009 18:04:34 -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 dRATp1lbNAAv; Thu, 1 Oct 2009 18:04:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8D8B2BAAD3; Thu, 1 Oct 2009 18:04:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id BDF7EF593D; Thu, 1 Oct 2009 15:04:30 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 22:04:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Jonas Maebe Cc: Tom Tromey , Mark Kettenis , gdb-patches ml Subject: Re: [patch] Set calling convention of methods Message-ID: <20091001220430.GS10338@adacore.com> References: <691B0BA8-C606-42FF-A796-76CC9C31556A@elis.ugent.be> <200904222215.n3MMF0p2006994@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <19C107AA-5271-4C23-A6D2-AFF75BBAC4E4@elis.ugent.be> <5AA3BCA9-1ECF-446E-8B49-3132F0E470FB@elis.ugent.be> <20090930000225.GA10338@adacore.com> <8F3B6095-4766-432D-ABB5-AB4DAA2D5572@elis.ugent.be> <267A47C4-C452-4EC5-B74E-7C5C26AF227E@elis.ugent.be> <20090930162510.GE10338@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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: 2009-10/txt/msg00034.txt.bz2 > Ok. Note that my mail client is known to wrap text at 80 columns [...] If that's the case, then let's avoid inlined patches. We sometimes try to apply your patch for various reasons such as testing, etc. I'd rather have an encoded attachment rather than a malformed patch. > Given that it was later confirmed that the file does belong to gcc, > should I resend my patch for dwarf2.h to the gcc patches list? Yes please. Ping them until someone finally gives the OK. Do mention that this needs to be accepted under the "tiny change" rule, as you are still working on copyright assignment for GCC. I'll review the rest of the patch hopefully tomorrow. -- Joel