From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15745 invoked by alias); 2 Oct 2002 01:11:41 -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 15598 invoked from network); 2 Oct 2002 01:11:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO touchme.toronto.redhat.com) (216.138.202.10) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 2 Oct 2002 01:11:40 -0000 Received: from localhost.redhat.com (to-dhcp51.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.151]) by touchme.toronto.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FBD08000F4; Tue, 1 Oct 2002 21:11:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCCE33ED5; Tue, 1 Oct 2002 21:11:42 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3D9A47CE.3040104@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 01 Oct 2002 18:11:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020824 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: Michael Snyder , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Outstanding? References: <3D93CD83.5020704@redhat.com> <3D9A1FEE.A8BE31F7@redhat.com> <3D9A2DC7.5000706@redhat.com> <20021002003826.GA24558@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-10/txt/msg00035.txt.bz2 > On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 07:20:39PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote: > >> Just FYI, I got my outstanding down to zero. >> Everything is now a bug report. See: >> http://sources.redhat.com/gdb/bugs/ > > > Really? Where are they all? Many of the threads were not for patches. Rather for issues, questions and other problems. None of those lead to a bug report. > You filed fifty or so PRs, I think. Looks like 725 through 769. Your > outstanding list was oodles longer even ignoring duplicates. For > instance, choosing one at random, the controversial breakpoint at the > beginning of the prologue patch; there's no bug report for that. My understanding of that patch was ``no CLI change''. See MichaelS's comment. Someone can change the MI if they so feel. > Just don't want you to think they're all accounted for and start losing > them... ? Andrew