From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout02.posteo.de (mout02.posteo.de [185.67.36.66]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6EDEB386F824 for ; Tue, 12 May 2020 15:49:08 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 6EDEB386F824 Received: from submission (posteo.de [89.146.220.130]) by mout02.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A02F42400FC for ; Tue, 12 May 2020 17:49:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 49M2KY6Vg8z9rxf; Tue, 12 May 2020 17:49:05 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] gdbsupport: Extend construct_inferior_arguments to allow handling all stringify_args cases To: Simon Marchi , Christian Biesinger Cc: gdb-patches References: <20200429111638.1327262-1-m.weghorn@posteo.de> <20200429111638.1327262-3-m.weghorn@posteo.de> <1c46b1a7-4ce9-cab0-dd16-f1f6bf8d9df3@simark.ca> From: Michael Weghorn Message-ID: <96af7c9c-01d7-06ab-9645-6afaea4d26e5@posteo.de> Date: Tue, 12 May 2020 17:48:54 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1c46b1a7-4ce9-cab0-dd16-f1f6bf8d9df3@simark.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, 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: Tue, 12 May 2020 15:49:10 -0000 On 07/05/2020 21.29, Simon Marchi wrote: > On 2020-04-29 11:45 a.m., Christian Biesinger via Gdb-patches wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 10:25 AM Christian Biesinger >> wrote: >>> >>> Can you clarify which revision your patch is against? My files look >>> nothing like the ones you are patching. >> >> Oh, I see now that this patch applies on top of the other patch series you sent. > > I was also confused, normally the patch 0/N is the cover letter, not a patch > to apply. > > Simon > Sorry for the confusion! It's the first time I'm contributing to a project using this workflow and I misunderstood how to properly do it. For the new version of the patch series, the patches now actually start with "PATCH v3 1/6". This also means that the patch numbers are no longer the same as in the previous version, which was no longer the case due to added/removed patches. I've declared all patches as "v3", so all patches in the series have the same version number again. (previous "[PATCH v2 1/4]" had v2 already, while the others didn't.) I hope this is OK, but am happy to hear about a better way to do this in the future. Michael