From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org (eggs.gnu.org [IPv6:2001:470:142:3::10]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 262993857C49 for ; Sat, 25 Jul 2020 07:57:08 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 262993857C49 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=gnu.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=eliz@gnu.org Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:41711) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jzF3L-0000fx-8Z; Sat, 25 Jul 2020 03:57:07 -0400 Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=1333 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1jzF38-0006Ui-K9; Sat, 25 Jul 2020 03:57:05 -0400 Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2020 10:56:41 +0300 Message-Id: <83pn8kc9ja.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Joel Brobecker Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: <20200719150341.GA11122@adacore.com> (message from Joel Brobecker on Sun, 19 Jul 2020 08:03:41 -0700) Subject: Re: GDB 10 branching - 2020-07-18 Update References: <20200718194522.GA32708@adacore.com> <83zh7wgrwn.fsf@gnu.org> <20200719150341.GA11122@adacore.com> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2020 07:57:14 -0000 > Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2020 08:03:41 -0700 > From: Joel Brobecker > Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org > > > Joel, are you waiting for me here? If so, what shall I do? I thought > > you'll go ahead and install the changes you sent me and I tested. > > It must have been a misunderstanding. I was indeed hoping you would be > the one submitting the patch. I was only helping you re-generate the > configury scripts to help you avoid having to get the exact versions > we expect to use, when generating them. I would be happy to help submit > them for you if I wasn't already unsuccesful myself in submitting my > own patches :-(. I'll gladly do that, but unfortunately I've managed to lose the configure.ac test you sent to me, which was different from what I originally proposed. Could you please re-send it to me? Sorry for my sloppiness.