From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 45077 invoked by alias); 30 Jul 2015 21:32:34 -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 45068 invoked by uid 89); 30 Jul 2015 21:32:33 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 21:32:33 +0000 Received: from int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.27]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F07ECAC84B; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 21:32:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from valrhona.uglyboxes.com (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t6ULWU5X001433 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 30 Jul 2015 17:32:31 -0400 Message-ID: <55BA97EE.90708@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 21:32:00 -0000 From: Keith Seitz User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sandra Loosemore CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [committed, testsuite] Reapply fix for gdb.cp/var-tag.exp C++ failures References: <55BA74C2.8050800@codesourcery.com> <55BA8F8C.8080301@redhat.com> <55BA960F.7020508@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: <55BA960F.7020508@codesourcery.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-07/txt/msg00922.txt.bz2 On 07/30/2015 02:24 PM, Sandra Loosemore wrote: > Oh, argh. I had fixed this in the local GIT branch I'm using for > testing, and then applied the wrong version of the patch to the master > branch to check in. Here is the correct patch; I hope I've fixed this > up correctly on master now. Everything looks good. /me happy it wasn't him this time! :-) Keith