Re: [PATCH 2/2 version 2] fix for gdb.reverse/finish-precsave.exp and gdb.reverse/finish-reverse.exp

Tom de Vries via Gdb-patches
2023-01-17T17:14:46Z

On 1/17/23 18:03, Carl Love wrote:
> Tom:
>
> On Tue, 2023-01-17 at 17:55 +0100, Tom de Vries wrote:
>> AFAICT, this has been committed just now.
>>
>> I'm having difficulty finding an approval, did it happen maybe
>> offlist?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> - Tom
>
> I just committed it based on Bruno's reply.
>
> > The patch has been tested on X86 and PowerPC with no regressions.
>
> I will reiterate that I don't know much about PPC, so the best I can do
> is check for style and tests, but apart from a few minor nits inlined,
> it looks ok
>
> Tested-By: Bruno Larsen <blarsen@redhat.com>
>
> I thought that was an approval to commit. Is it not?

Hi Carl,

sorry, AFAIU it's not. Bruno has been helpfully reviewing your patch,
but AFAIK he cannot approve it.

This is an easy mistake to make though, given the used formulation, it's
not the first time it happened, and it's one of the reasons we're trying
to move towards replying with the Approved-By tag to make approval more
formal, explicit and unambiguous.

FYI, I'm working my way toward reviewing these patches, and have
regained access to my usual powerpc machine, so I'll try to reproduce
the issue you're seeing.

Thanks,
- Tom