From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16088 invoked by alias); 9 Jul 2002 03:48:52 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 16056 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2002 03:48:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO www.dberlin.org) (138.88.46.115) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 9 Jul 2002 03:48:49 -0000 Received: by www.dberlin.org (Postfix, from userid 503) id 40C06181BE81; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 23:48:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from Daniel-Berlins-Computer (unknown [10.0.0.254]) by www.dberlin.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BEA8181BE80; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 23:48:41 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2002 20:49:00 -0000 Subject: Re: [RFA]: dwarf2expr.[ch] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v530) Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com To: Andrew Cagney From: Daniel Berlin In-Reply-To: <3D2A555C.9060500@ges.redhat.com> Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.6 required=5.0 tests=IN_REP_TO,NO_MX_FOR_FROM,AWL version=2.31 X-Spam-Level: X-SW-Source: 2002-07/txt/msg00136.txt.bz2 On Monday, July 8, 2002, at 11:15 PM, Andrew Cagney wrote: > Daniel, > > Just a reminder. As a GNU developer, you're expected to submit > patches that meet the GNU coding standard. This is important as it > saves on significiant run-around time spent by both yourself and the > reviewer. > I'll just ignore this sentence, rather than point out just how absurd this statement is when it comes to GDB development. If you feel the need to remind me, I'm pretty sure you don't need to copy gdb-patches and Jim. Especially since this seems to be a personal message addressed to me. Not that I mind, but i'm pretty sure Jim doesn't care, and it's debatable whether anyone else does. > I guess you ment, work-in-progress. > No, I diffed the wrong version. It's a moot issue anyway, as I said, since it's just two new files that are really part of another patch I need to resubmit with revisions anyway. the RFA was added by my mailer as the default subject prefix for new messages gdb-patches and i didn't notice. > enjoy, > Andrew > >