Hi Joel,

Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com> wrote on 08.01.2009 12:10:02:

> > Hmm, at home it isn't hard to do this, but at office I have to fight 
with 
> > Lotus. I'll see what can do.
> 
> Thanks for doing that. Perhaps, if Lotus doesn't muck the contents
> of your emails, one solution is to inline the patch inside the email
> body rather than as an attachment. If, as I fear, Lotus does things
> like breaking lines, etc, then the current approach at least allows
> us to receive the patch intact, which is the most important. Anyway,
> all this monologue just to say: Do your best :).
> 
> > > Can you also provide a ChangeLog entry when submitting patches?
> > 
> > I did in my first mail. I thought there is no new one necessary.
> 
> Hmmm, I thought I double-checked before mentioning it, sorry.
> 
> > 2009-01-08  Kai Tietz  <kai.tietz@onevision.com>
> > 
> >         * coff-pe-read.c (read_pe_exported_syms): Enable read of PE+ 
> > export directory.
> 
> Does "PE+" mean PE for 64bit?
> 
> > > > +  int be64 = 0;
> > > > +  int be32 = 0;
> > > 
> > > Would you mind explaining what "be" stands for?
> > 
> > the "be" from "to be, or not to be" ;)
> 
> In that case, I'd really like to use a more meaningful name.
> How about pe32_p and pe64_p? Or is_pe32 and is_pe64?

Fine for me, I changed the attached patch.

[...]
> 
> I think that it would be clearer to use 108 in this case than
> "92 + 16", because 92 in the PE+ case doesn't really mean anything,
> does it?
> 
> > > Same here.
> > 
> > The same reason. Structure IMAGE_DATA_DIRECTORY hasn't changed in 
sizes, 
> > therefore just the delta is necessary.
> 
> I also suggest the same as above, if you agree.

Ok, done.

> > AFAIC I have no write access (or write permissions) to gbd tree. I 
have 
> > already an account and write permissions for binutils.
> 
> Given that this patch qualifies as a good patch (or will qualify as soon
> as we agree on one version of it), you are eligible for receiving "Write
> After Approval" priviledges. What you need to do next, in parallel to
> this discussion, is ask overseers to adjust your priviledges.  This is
> what the account request on sourceware says about your case:
> 
>     Note that if you already have an account on sourceware.org or
>     gcc.gnu.org for CVS or Subversion write access, then do not use this
>     form. Instead send an email to the overseers mail account at this 
site
>     telling what project you want write access to and who approved that
>     access.
> 
> You can list me as the approver.

Thanks, I sent mail to the overseers.

Cheers,
Kai



|  (\_/)  This is Bunny. Copy and paste Bunny
| (='.'=) into your signature to help him gain
| (")_(") world domination.