From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21238 invoked by alias); 27 Jan 2010 17:10:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 21219 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Jan 2010 17:10:54 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 17:10:48 +0000 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o0RHAlOp032380 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 12:10:47 -0500 Received: from [10.15.16.55] (toner.yyz.redhat.com [10.15.16.55]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o0RHAkS2012717 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 12:10:46 -0500 Message-ID: <4B60746A.2080107@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 17:10:00 -0000 From: Sami Wagiaalla User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100120 Fedora/3.0.1-1.fc12 Thunderbird/3.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFA 2/4] dwarf2_physname References: <4B0707E7.5010308@uglyboxes.com> <20091120220927.GA9589@caradoc.them.org> <4B0ABD84.5040606@redhat.com> <20091123170710.GA15216@caradoc.them.org> <4B0C322E.7070503@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <4B0C322E.7070503@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2010-01/txt/msg00593.txt.bz2 On 11/24/2009 02:21 PM, Sami Wagiaalla wrote: > On 11/23/2009 12:07 PM, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: >> On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 08:51:16AM -0800, Keith Seitz wrote: >>> On 11/20/2009 02:09 PM, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: >>> >>>> I am generally opposed to committing known regressions. If there are >>>> supporting patches we need to get in first, let's do that; if there >>>> are tests we decide to break, let's XFAIL or KFAIL them. That's the >>>> only way we can make the testsuite more useful. >>> >>> Sami has a follow-on patch that he could submit to fix all of these >>> tests (they all pass on archer-keiths-expr-cumulative). Perhaps it >>> would be acceptable for Sami to submit that patchset when/if this >>> patch is accepted? [His patches rely on this patchset.] >> >> If it applies on top of this, could he post it now? Then we can treat >> them as a unit for review and testing purposes. >> > > I looked into this. It turns out that this is fixed by the patches > posted on the thread rooted at this message > http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-07/msg00305.html > These patches have been approved and committed. Sami