From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18788 invoked by alias); 10 Feb 2004 19:37:41 -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 18772 invoked from network); 10 Feb 2004 19:37:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO touchme.toronto.redhat.com) (216.129.200.20) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 10 Feb 2004 19:37:40 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (toocool.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.72]) by touchme.toronto.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAEDE800195; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 14:37:39 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <40293303.3080908@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 19:37:00 -0000 From: Jeff Johnston User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: drow@mvista.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA]: Patch for ia64-tdep.c to cross-compile References: <40282283.4090904@redhat.com> <20040210025527.GA16979@nevyn.them.org> <40292337.3090907@redhat.com> <2719-Tue10Feb2004210935+0200-eliz@elta.co.il> In-Reply-To: <2719-Tue10Feb2004210935+0200-eliz@elta.co.il> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-02/txt/msg00252.txt.bz2 Eli Zaretskii wrote: >>Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:30:15 -0500 >>From: Jeff Johnston >> >>>If this is an obvious patch, shouldn't we have some coding rule >>>somewhere to cover it? It certainly isn't obvious out of the GDB >>>context, i.e. not a standard coding practice. >> >>Eli, >> >> Do you want me to hold off on checking this in or do you just wish to discuss >>whether such a patch should be marked as obvious in the future? > > > I don't think you need to hold off; sorry that I wasn't more clear. > Thanks. I just wanted to be sure before checking it in. The patch has been checked in. > What I wanted to discuss is whether we need to put some text somewhere > that includes the use of paddr* functions in the GDB coding standards. > Then it would be clear that fixing any deviation from that falls under > the obvious fix rule. >