From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7252 invoked by alias); 5 Mar 2002 14:55:09 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 7059 invoked from network); 5 Mar 2002 14:54:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (24.112.135.44) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 5 Mar 2002 14:54:58 -0000 Received: from cygnus.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B9993CBA; Tue, 5 Mar 2002 09:54:56 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3C84DC40.3020306@cygnus.com> Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2002 06:55:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:0.9.8) Gecko/20020210 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Michal Ludvig Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] Bugfixes on x86-64 target References: <3C7F9777.4070009@cygnus.com> <3C835553.4080201@suse.cz> <3C84147D.5040504@cygnus.com> <3C84BF2F.4010202@suse.cz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-03/txt/msg00047.txt.bz2 >> x86-64 (--target=x86_64-linux-gnu broken) >> Michal Ludvig mludvig@suse.cz > >> Andrew Cagney wrote: >>> Andrew Cagney wrote: >>> Can I suggest adding your self to the maintainers file as an obvious fix (don't forget to post the patch). > >> Oops, sorry. I was thinking of write-after-approval. > Is it wrong? Can I remove the "broken" word? The target is not > broken when compiled natively. Sorry which, maintainer or broken? With respect to maintenance, I wrote something that could be interpreted in several different ways. I'm very sorry for this misunderstanding. You contributed a (correct?) patch, had an assignment on hand and hence ment the criteria for write-after-approval. A target should always be buildable as a cross. The other native-only target is HP/UX and that is also considered broken. Andrew