From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22722 invoked by alias); 26 Feb 2008 16:58:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 22713 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Feb 2008 16:58:26 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from dmz.mips-uk.com (HELO dmz.mips-uk.com) (194.74.144.194) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 16:58:09 +0000 Received: from internal-mx1 ([192.168.192.240] helo=ukservices1.mips.com) by dmz.mips-uk.com with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1JU382-00070E-00; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 16:58:06 +0000 Received: from perivale.mips.com ([192.168.192.200]) by ukservices1.mips.com with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1JU37x-0002Xd-00; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 16:58:01 +0000 Received: from macro (helo=localhost) by perivale.mips.com with local-esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JU37x-000789-3Z; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 16:58:01 +0000 Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 17:06:00 -0000 From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" To: Daniel Jacobowitz cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, David Ung , Nigel Stephens , "Maciej W. Rozycki" Subject: Re: MDI: testsuite support In-Reply-To: <20080226164649.GA22470@caradoc.them.org> Message-ID: References: <20080226161716.GB19531@caradoc.them.org> <20080226164649.GA22470@caradoc.them.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-MIPS-Technologies-UK-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MIPS-Technologies-UK-MailScanner-From: macro@mips.com 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: 2008-02/txt/msg00396.txt.bz2 On Tue, 26 Feb 2008, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > Which "rest of the MDI target" are you specifically referring to? > > I meant the actual target, that is, the bits this testsuite support > lets you test. You haven't posted that, have you? Hmm, I sent the bits back on Feb 15th -- I have not got a bounce, so I assumed it must have been successful. OK -- I'll resend. Is there a size limit on this list? The patch is over 300kB, so it may have been disliked because of the size (but then I would expect a bounce). Maciej