From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29648 invoked by alias); 25 Jul 2008 21:35:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 29504 invoked by uid 22791); 25 Jul 2008 21:35:12 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-out.google.com (HELO smtp-out.google.com) (216.239.33.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 25 Jul 2008 21:34:50 +0000 Received: from wpaz13.hot.corp.google.com (wpaz13.hot.corp.google.com [172.24.198.77]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id m6PLYbc7018088 for ; Fri, 25 Jul 2008 22:34:37 +0100 Received: from rv-out-0506.google.com (rvbg37.prod.google.com [10.140.83.37]) by wpaz13.hot.corp.google.com with ESMTP id m6PLYZLP014140 for ; Fri, 25 Jul 2008 14:34:36 -0700 Received: by rv-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id g37so2987189rvb.23 for ; Fri, 25 Jul 2008 14:34:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.141.163.12 with SMTP id q12mr1101543rvo.260.1217021675406; Fri, 25 Jul 2008 14:34:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.140.248.15 with HTTP; Fri, 25 Jul 2008 14:34:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <498552560807251434w6158eb16u32f53072917abd62@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 21:35:00 -0000 From: "=?BIG5?B?RG91ZyBLd2FuICjD9q62vHcp?=" To: drow@false.org, gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH][gdbserver] Check for sys/dir.h and sys.user.h in configuration. In-Reply-To: <20080723143258.GA12421@caradoc.them.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <498552560807221759w1ade0ec2jd63c12475ddb5217@mail.gmail.com> <1216784910.3549.496.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1216821712.5922.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080723143258.GA12421@caradoc.them.org> 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: 2008-07/txt/msg00457.txt.bz2 Hi Daniel, Sorry to bug you again. You are listed as the only maintainer of gdbserver so I would like to ask if it is okay to commit the new patch? I've removed the declaration of errno and regenerated configure using the autoconf-2.59 release. I don't have write access to the tree but I can find someone in Google to commit this if you approve the patch. Thanks -Doug 2008/7/23 Daniel Jacobowitz : > On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 11:01:51AM -0300, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: >> On Tue, 2008-07-22 at 20:48 -0700, Michael Snyder wrote: >> > I'm surprised by some of the diffs in the generated configure >> > script -- wonder if you used a different version of autoconf >> > or something? >> >> When I regenerate configure in my system here I get the same spurious >> diffs that Doug Kwan got. I'm using Debian, with autoconf package >> version 2.59a-3. > > Yes. If you want to get a clean diff, use the actual autoconf > release - not Debian's package of it. > > -- > Daniel Jacobowitz > CodeSourcery >