From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13095 invoked by alias); 6 May 2013 16:19:05 -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 13086 invoked by uid 89); 6 May 2013 16:19:05 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-4.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_NO,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE,SPF_SOFTFAIL autolearn=no version=3.3.1 Received: from mtaout23.012.net.il (HELO mtaout23.012.net.il) (80.179.55.175) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Mon, 06 May 2013 16:19:04 +0000 Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout23.012.net.il by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0MMD00I00XATLF00@a-mtaout23.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Mon, 06 May 2013 19:18:57 +0300 (IDT) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0MMD00IDLXBIK140@a-mtaout23.012.net.il>; Mon, 06 May 2013 19:18:54 +0300 (IDT) Date: Mon, 06 May 2013 16:19:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] GDB 7.6 released! In-reply-to: <20130506103203.GC5278@adacore.com> To: Joel Brobecker Cc: jan.kratochvil@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii Message-id: <83ehdkf5ei.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83k3nptk18.fsf@gnu.org> <837gjotnc9.fsf@gnu.org> <20130428073805.GU3525@adacore.com> <20130505194406.GA15079@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20130506103203.GC5278@adacore.com> X-SW-Source: 2013-05/txt/msg00123.txt.bz2 > Date: Mon, 6 May 2013 14:32:03 +0400 > From: Joel Brobecker > Cc: Eli Zaretskii , gdb-patches@sourceware.org > > > While according to the GDB rules the throw_perror_with_name function > > could be removed now (merged back into perror_with_name) I do not find > > it completely right, throw_perror_with_name is a logical part in the > > whole error reporting set and it is only coincidence it has currently > > no users. > > I had a feeling that we'd feel that way. No problem with that on my end. So is it OK to include exceptions.h in utils.h?