From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 39087 invoked by alias); 9 Feb 2016 10:55:16 -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 39068 invoked by uid 89); 9 Feb 2016 10:55:15 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=secs, Hx-languages-length:1527, morning 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; Tue, 09 Feb 2016 10:55:14 +0000 Received: from int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.26]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0FAD5804E6; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 10:55:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u19AtBa5031649; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 05:55:12 -0500 Message-ID: <56B9C58F.8030500@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2016 10:55:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Tedeschi, Walfred" CC: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: [obv. PATCH 1/1] Fix build breakage References: <1455013458-14340-1-git-send-email-walfred.tedeschi@intel.com> <56B9BFF3.7020905@redhat.com> <56B9C455.7040803@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <56B9C455.7040803@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2016-02/txt/msg00214.txt.bz2 On 02/09/2016 10:49 AM, Pedro Alves wrote: > On 02/09/2016 10:37 AM, Tedeschi, Walfred wrote: >> From: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org [mailto:gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org] On Behalf Of Pedro Alves > >> How is this better than what Simon proposed? > >> I haven't seem Simon's proposal, have just feel sorry to have caused this breakage, and tried to fix. >> Just noticed that with the e-mail from Sergio this early morning. > > Simon's fix was quoted in Sergio's e-mail. :-) > >> I will revert what I just pushed, > > You reverted one patch unrelated patch too: > > commit 0635c8759326e9431604b3359185cbf96740521d > Author: Walfred Tedeschi > > Revert "Add a more helpful warning message to explain why some AArch64 relocations can overflow." > > This reverts commit 2ea53e003163338a403d5afbb2046cafb8f3abe9. > > I've reapplied 2ea53e003163 now, preserving the original author (for "git blame"). > > > BTW, given you first fixed the C++ build, and then broke it again with > the revert, you should have gotten another e-mail from the buildbot > about C++ build breakage. Can you confirm whether you got one this time? Actually, the builder hasn't moved on past your reversion, we'll need to wait a few minutes more to check that. http://gdb-build.sergiodj.net/builders/Fedora-x86_64-cxx-build-m64 Pending Build Requests: (Feb 09 05:39:21, waiting 13 mins, 5 secs) c23bbc1cdae6... (Walfred Tedeschi ) Thanks, Pedro Alves