From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22686 invoked by alias); 1 Oct 2013 13:57:43 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 22677 invoked by uid 89); 1 Oct 2013 13:57:42 -0000 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Oct 2013 13:57:42 +0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r91Dveqx031815 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Tue, 1 Oct 2013 09:57:40 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r91DvcOh004584; Tue, 1 Oct 2013 09:57:39 -0400 Message-ID: <524AD4D2.5020008@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 01 Oct 2013 13:57:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130625 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jan Kratochvil CC: Ondrej Oprala , "'gdb-patches@sourceware.org'" Subject: Re: C++-compat clean build References: <524AB12E.8090209@redhat.com> <20131001125338.GA12847@host2.jankratochvil.net> In-Reply-To: <20131001125338.GA12847@host2.jankratochvil.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2013-10/txt/msg00051.txt.bz2 On 10/01/2013 01:53 PM, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > Hi Ondrej, > > On Tue, 01 Oct 2013 13:25:34 +0200, Ondrej Oprala wrote: >> this is the first of a few patches I intend to write to make gdb >> code compile cleanly with -Wc++-compat. >> The idea is to make separate patches for respective subdirs under >> gdb/, unless someone objects ofc. > > this is a too huge patch. It should import first archer/tromey/c++ which is > already separated into specific parts, that is each commit in that branch > should be a separate posted mail/patch. This could also state the gcc error > that occured, it is not always clear for review (such as the ptrace case). > > According to gdb/CONTRIBUTE there should be written ChangeLog entries, that is > what will be written to gdb/ChangeLog (one writes them as plain text into the > mail, not directly patching the file gdb/ChangeLog, as the ChangeLog patch > would get immediately out of scope). Some requests for comments without > immediate check-in may got without ChangeLog entry, such as this preview > patch. See also , which talks about that and more. > > It is not a requirement but the preference is to post the patches inlined in > the mail text; just I am not sure Thunderbird will not corrupt it, your mail > body is format=flowed which would corrupt it, OTOH without format=flowed some > mailers wrap the patch to some fixed column. So maybe the attachment is the > least worst for Thunderbird. At you'll find a link to mozilla's own knowledge base explaining how to configure Thunderbird for sending patches. -- Pedro Alves