From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6703 invoked by alias); 2 Jun 2010 00:41:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 6694 invoked by uid 22791); 2 Jun 2010 00:41:16 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 Jun 2010 00:41:06 +0000 Received: from int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.21]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o520eq30016583 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 1 Jun 2010 20:40:52 -0400 Received: from psique.localnet (vpn-227-25.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.227.25]) by int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o520enNV009354; Tue, 1 Jun 2010 20:40:49 -0400 From: Sergio Durigan Junior To: Joel Brobecker Subject: Re: [PATCH] Remove unused exp_opcodes Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2010 00:41:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.2 (Linux/2.6.32.12-115.fc12.x86_64; KDE/4.4.2; x86_64; ; ) Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <201006011748.43410.sergiodj@redhat.com> <20100601215926.GU3019@adacore.com> In-Reply-To: <20100601215926.GU3019@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201006012140.47989.sergiodj@redhat.com> 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: 2010-06/txt/msg00035.txt.bz2 On Tuesday 01 June 2010 18:59:26, Joel Brobecker wrote: > Thanks for doing that cleanup. This patch is OK. Thank you, Joel. The patch has been commited. > I'll confess that I am not quite sure whether you're supposed to close > the '<' at the end of the line, or whether it can continue on the next > line like you did. I don't think it's a huge deal, but we can fix that > if someone knows and it turns out to be wrong... I actually used this entry as an example: http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-cvs/2010-06/msg00003.html Thanks, -- Sergio Durigan Junior Red Hat