From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26308 invoked by alias); 7 Apr 2008 19:13:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 26299 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Apr 2008 19:13:51 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from bluesmobile.specifix.com (HELO bluesmobile.specifix.com) (216.129.118.140) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 07 Apr 2008 19:13:32 +0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (bluesmobile.specifix.com [216.129.118.140]) by bluesmobile.specifix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E6FD3BDCD; Mon, 7 Apr 2008 12:13:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: Record patch in main GDB tree? From: Michael Snyder To: jonatan perry Cc: gdb@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2008 19:30:00 -0000 Message-Id: <1207595611.31772.332.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.10.3 (2.10.3-7.fc7) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-04/txt/msg00063.txt.bz2 On Mon, 2008-04-07 at 20:32 +0200, jonatan perry wrote: > Hi list :) > I was wonder - why does the *record patch isn't merged to the main GDB > development tree? > > *http://sourceforge.net/projects/record/ > > Thanks, > Jonatan Perry. First I recall hearing of it. Has anybody offered to submit it to gdb?