From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-122971-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 49139 invoked by alias); 16 May 2015 16:06:06 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 49118 invoked by uid 89); 16 May 2015 16:06:06 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=no version=3.3.2
X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com
Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Sat, 16 May 2015 16:06:05 +0000
Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23])	by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 845D0BDD8C;	Sat, 16 May 2015 16:06:04 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from host1.jankratochvil.net (ovpn-116-27.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.27])	by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t4GG5rqO027531	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO);	Sat, 16 May 2015 12:05:59 -0400
Date: Sat, 16 May 2015 16:06:00 -0000
From: Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
To: Patrick Palka <patrick@parcs.ath.cx>
Cc: Doug Evans <dje@google.com>, gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFC] Sync readline to version 6.3 patchlevel 8
Message-ID: <20150516160551.GA15296@host1.jankratochvil.net>
References: <1431562331-20448-1-git-send-email-patrick@parcs.ath.cx> <CADPb22RQi=S3ygBGL-b5+XD=Eyz+aKeQXmjE+5iSiazA-=4M7Q@mail.gmail.com> <CA+C-WL9Nqa7G4Wh1kszePEjQ5HwFNT5MsX+J5GFCswNDY1GPVQ@mail.gmail.com> <CADPb22SQpS1qwJ-uWQ+=JC-Z62YQBY9xGjxMRpx-2oEQHMuyiA@mail.gmail.com> <20150516152514.GA12510@host1.jankratochvil.net> <CA+C-WL-A46fNMKtMKG5XfoHjESfbh+_ss0BncdB+GK9hEFsRvA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CA+C-WL-A46fNMKtMKG5XfoHjESfbh+_ss0BncdB+GK9hEFsRvA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
X-IsSubscribed: yes
X-SW-Source: 2015-05/txt/msg00443.txt.bz2

On Sat, 16 May 2015 17:50:14 +0200, Patrick Palka wrote:
> On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Jan Kratochvil
> <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, 16 May 2015 17:23:23 +0200, Doug Evans wrote:
> >> Another thought is that IWBN if the reapplication of local patches was
> >> a separate commit.
> >
> > IIUC this would break git bisect.
> 
> Unless the local patch fixes a major issue (or perhaps a build error),

I wrote it in general.  When I read now that the only remaining patch is some
MS-Windows-specific one I agree it is safe; I doubt anyone would bisect on
MS-Windows or that it is too important.


Jan