From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21530 invoked by alias); 25 Jul 2012 15:37:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 21461 invoked by uid 22791); 25 Jul 2012 15:37:19 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_NO,SPF_SOFTFAIL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il (HELO mtaout22.012.net.il) (80.179.55.172) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 25 Jul 2012 15:37:04 +0000 Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0M7Q00800358E100@a-mtaout22.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Wed, 25 Jul 2012 18:36:42 +0300 (IDT) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.210.75]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0M7Q0088V3D57I50@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Wed, 25 Jul 2012 18:36:42 +0300 (IDT) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 15:37:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] change gdb to refcount bfd everywhere In-reply-to: <87sjcflxza.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> To: Tom Tromey Cc: jan.kratochvil@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii Message-id: <83boj3lunn.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87vchk3lxs.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20120719141750.GB23801@host2.jankratochvil.net> <877gtzxyck.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <87sjcmv16h.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20120723085355.GA29593@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20120723090609.GA32703@host2.jankratochvil.net> <87mx2qqz79.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20120724131720.GB24427@host2.jankratochvil.net> <87eho1ndi4.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <83haswlxbv.fsf@gnu.org> <87sjcflxza.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> X-IsSubscribed: yes 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 X-SW-Source: 2012-07/txt/msg00542.txt.bz2 > From: Tom Tromey > Cc: jan.kratochvil@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org > Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 08:24:57 -0600 > > Here is a new patch that addresses both these reviews. > > Ok? Fine with me, thanks.