From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24840 invoked by alias); 25 Mar 2013 10:12:12 -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 24802 invoked by uid 89); 25 Mar 2013 10:12:04 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_SOFTFAIL autolearn=no version=3.3.1 Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il (HELO mtaout22.012.net.il) (80.179.55.172) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Mon, 25 Mar 2013 10:12:01 +0000 Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0MK700K00OB0OT00@a-mtaout22.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Mon, 25 Mar 2013 12:11:34 +0200 (IST) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0MK700KY4OB5O410@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Mon, 25 Mar 2013 12:11:30 +0200 (IST) Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 14:25:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: [MinGW-w64]Build gdb/ctf.c failed In-reply-to: To: Kai Tietz Cc: asmwarrior@gmail.com, tromey@redhat.com, yao@codesourcery.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii Message-id: <8338vj3i1w.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83ip4s4ixc.fsf@gnu.org> <1363407692-18959-1-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> <1363407692-18959-4-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> <51492077.30307@codesourcery.com> <83sj3qyogk.fsf@gnu.org> <87vc8m7z1d.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <514FA117.9030604@gmail.com> <83hajz3oef.fsf@gnu.org> <83boa73mty.fsf@gnu.org> <837gkv3maf.fsf@gnu.org> X-SW-Source: 2013-03/txt/msg00927.txt.bz2 > Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 10:15:14 +0100 > From: Kai Tietz > Cc: asmwarrior@gmail.com, tromey@redhat.com, yao@codesourcery.com, > gdb-patches@sourceware.org > > >> You are driveling ... > > > > Very mature. Thanks a lot. > > Be welcome. I'm not, actually. > Sorry, but I want to insist on such apparent things. I am wondering > about your arguments, due you should know better. I have no idea what I "should know better". If you wonder about my arguments, you can always ask for clarifications. We are both writing in a language that isn't our first one, so misunderstanding is much more probable than anything else. Anyway, I meant what I wrote. I still do. Labeling that as "drivel" doesn't make you right and me wrong, it just offends and thus tends to make me wish I never spoke to you, and shouldn't do that in the future, to cut my losses.