From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16024 invoked by alias); 16 Feb 2006 11:06:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 16014 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Feb 2006 11:06:54 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from jess.glam.ac.uk (HELO jess.glam.ac.uk) (193.63.147.97) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 16 Feb 2006 11:06:53 +0000 Received: from mailserv1.isd.glam.ac.uk ([192.168.244.1]) by jess.glam.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 1F9gpB-0003sA-00; Thu, 16 Feb 2006 10:57:25 +0000 Received: from j228-gm.comp.glam.ac.uk ([193.63.148.84]) by MAILSERV1.isd.glam.ac.uk with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Thu, 16 Feb 2006 11:06:48 +0000 Received: from gaius by j228-gm.comp.glam.ac.uk with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1F9gxr-0002Vs-TC; Thu, 16 Feb 2006 11:06:23 +0000 To: Jim Blandy Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Enhanced language support for Modula-2 References: <87vevg9puv.fsf@j228-gm.comp.glam.ac.uk> <8f2776cb0602151619w5fd8f043u3e7227e27f3567a9@mail.gmail.com> From: Gaius Mulley Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 11:06:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <8f2776cb0602151619w5fd8f043u3e7227e27f3567a9@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <877j7v7ec0.fsf@j228-gm.comp.glam.ac.uk> User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-02/txt/msg00324.txt.bz2 Jim Blandy writes: > Hi, Gaius. Thanks for the patch. > > I went back and looked at Waldek's patch from last May, and as I said > in October, it still looks fine. However, Waldek does not have > copyright assignment paperwork on file for changes to GDB, so we need > to get that process completed before we can put in his patch. > > You, however, do have paperwork on file. To avoid blocking your patch > on Waldek's paperwork, could you produce a version of your patch that > does not assume Waldek's patch is applied? Hi, certainly.. will do.. Gaius