From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1678 invoked by alias); 5 Nov 2009 20:04:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 1670 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Nov 2009 20:04:06 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 05 Nov 2009 20:04:02 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5517C10EC9; Thu, 5 Nov 2009 20:03:56 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (209.195.188.212.nauticom.net [209.195.188.212]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4302510EA9; Thu, 5 Nov 2009 20:03:56 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1N68Yl-0004uT-Vd; Thu, 05 Nov 2009 15:03:55 -0500 Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2009 20:04:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch] Fix false separate debuginfo warning for no .debug suffix [Re: Recent separate debug file warning caused Debian regressions] Message-ID: <20091105200355.GB18502@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Jan Kratochvil , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20091102215255.GA19425@caradoc.them.org> <20091103104419.GA9780@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <20091103170004.GA915@caradoc.them.org> <20091104232643.GA15891@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20091104232643.GA15891@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2009-11/txt/msg00099.txt.bz2 On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 12:26:43AM +0100, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > for a proper form of check-in for: > [patch] AC_SYS_LARGEFILE > http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-11/msg00047.html > > which is a prerequisite of this patch. I hope the regression is not so urgent > to require a temporary workaround instead. Thanks for letting me know. I think it's fine; I can just ignore the failures for a little longer... -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery