From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10241 invoked by alias); 14 Jan 2011 18:52:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 10233 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Jan 2011 18:52:55 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-outbound-1.vmware.com (HELO smtp-outbound-1.vmware.com) (65.115.85.69) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 14 Jan 2011 18:52:51 +0000 Received: from mailhost2.vmware.com (mailhost2.vmware.com [10.16.67.167]) by smtp-outbound-1.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B153A5C007; Fri, 14 Jan 2011 10:52:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from msnyder-server.eng.vmware.com (promd-2s-dhcp138.eng.vmware.com [10.20.124.138]) by mailhost2.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A61368E59F; Fri, 14 Jan 2011 10:52:50 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4D309B82.7070104@vmware.com> Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2011 18:54:00 -0000 From: Michael Snyder User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20101201) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pierre Muller CC: 'Pedro Alves' , "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" , 'Joel Brobecker' Subject: Re: [RFC-v2] Fix hpux_major_release variable setting References: <000f01cbb401$1093cdc0$31bb6940$@muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr> <20110114163035.GQ2504@adacore.com> <000001cbb40b$b03b3020$10b19060$@muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr> <201101141757.53748.pedro@codesourcery.com> <000301cbb41a$c115c590$434150b0$@muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr> In-Reply-To: <000301cbb41a$c115c590$434150b0$@muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr> 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: 2011-01/txt/msg00342.txt.bz2 Pierre Muller wrote: > Thanks for the feedback to > Pedro and Joel. > > Committed with void added. > > Pierre > > PS: The nit by Joel was a problem when I sent the patch, > there are no 4 empty lines, but > there is a "^L" line, which got lost > by the way I sent the patch in. Does it make sense to remove these ^L characters? I doubt if anybody prints out these sources any more...