From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18119 invoked by alias); 29 Jan 2010 05:32:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 18109 invoked by uid 22791); 29 Jan 2010 05:32:53 -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; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 05:32:48 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A0722BABC2 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 00:32:47 -0500 (EST) 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 eTB-2JLVXc0j for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 00:32:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2C6C2BABAC for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 00:32:46 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id CB537F59A0; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 09:32:24 +0400 (RET) Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 05:32:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [amd64-windows] Fix function calls on amd64-windows Message-ID: <20100129053224.GF26827@adacore.com> References: <1264398132-1429-1-git-send-email-brobecker@adacore.com> <20100125182821.GA32050@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100125182821.GA32050@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) 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: 2010-01/txt/msg00634.txt.bz2 > I don't believe that I am the maintainer of the x86_64 files but these > changes look ok to me. Thanks for the review - they are always appreciated, regardless of is spending the time to look at the patch... I have now checked in all the patches. Jan made a suggestion privately, and I decided that it was simpler for me to do a follow up patch, rather than redoing the patch. It's really minor and almost stylistic, but a worthwhile suggestion nonetheless, so I will work on it asap. -- Joel