From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1950 invoked by alias); 8 Nov 2012 19:21:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 1942 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Nov 2012 19:21:27 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_SPAMHAUS_DROP,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 08 Nov 2012 19:21:18 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id qA8JLHeM025688 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 8 Nov 2012 14:21:17 -0500 Received: from barimba (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id qA8JLGbj008621 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 8 Nov 2012 14:21:16 -0500 From: Tom Tromey To: Pedro Alves Cc: Doug Evans , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Always include defs.h first. References: <20121107201107.25258.47267.stgit@brno.lan> <509BE290.4000104@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2012 19:21:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <509BE290.4000104@redhat.com> (Pedro Alves's message of "Thu, 08 Nov 2012 16:49:20 +0000") Message-ID: <87fw4jj3yr.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain 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: 2012-11/txt/msg00207.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves writes: Pedro> OTOH, IMO, defs.h is special. Yes, it is. I'm in favor of this patch. A different approach globally might be preferable. But, that is a separate discussion. Your patch simply brings the rest of gdb in line with what I understood to be existing practice. We've certainly asked patch submitters to make this change before... Please put it in. Tom