From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28279 invoked by alias); 18 Jun 2009 17:59:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 28271 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Jun 2009 17:59:41 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx2.redhat.com (HELO mx2.redhat.com) (66.187.237.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 18 Jun 2009 17:59:29 +0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n5IHxRXA006521; Thu, 18 Jun 2009 13:59:27 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n5IHxQxh031220; Thu, 18 Jun 2009 13:59:26 -0400 Received: from opsy.redhat.com (vpn-14-1.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.14.1]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n5IHxPY0014094; Thu, 18 Jun 2009 13:59:26 -0400 Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 3A1333784B7; Thu, 18 Jun 2009 11:59:25 -0600 (MDT) To: Samuel Bronson Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Fix for PR gdb/9903 (part 1) References: <1245277318-12742-1-git-send-email-naesten@gmail.com> From: Tom Tromey Reply-To: tromey@redhat.com Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 17:59:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <1245277318-12742-1-git-send-email-naesten@gmail.com> (Samuel Bronson's message of "Wed\, 17 Jun 2009 18\:21\:57 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 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: 2009-06/txt/msg00487.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Samuel" == Samuel Bronson writes: Samuel> * cli/cli-decode.c (apropos_cmd): Fix avoidance of double Samuel> printing. These two patches look good to me. Since they are very small I will commit them (a bit later). However, future patches, regardless of size, will have to wait for your paperwork to clear. In a case like this, where someone else is committing the patch, it is simpler for us if you send a complete ChangeLog entry, including the header. (Or if not simpler, it is at least traditional :-) Also in this particular case I would add the PR number to the entry. Like: 2009-06-17 Samuel Bronson PR cli/9930: * cli/cli-decode.c (apropos_cmd): Fix avoidance of double printing. This addition means that the commit message will automatically be logged in bugzilla. Tom