From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8020 invoked by alias); 1 Oct 2009 18:25:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 8005 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Oct 2009 18:25:44 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Oct 2009 18:25:37 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4E562BABAB; Thu, 1 Oct 2009 14:25:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id GX3spkG9Amfk; Thu, 1 Oct 2009 14:25:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E6422BABA6; Thu, 1 Oct 2009 14:25:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B2446F593D; Thu, 1 Oct 2009 11:25:32 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 18:25:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Ralf Corsepius Cc: gdb@sourceware.org, Jan Kratochvil , Tom Tromey Subject: Re: GDB 6.8.92 available for testing Message-ID: <20091001182532.GF6532@adacore.com> References: <20090930204828.GB31446@adacore.com> <4AC41F44.1040502@rtems.org> <20091001170744.GC6532@adacore.com> <4AC4E4F6.5080500@rtems.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4AC4E4F6.5080500@rtems.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) 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: 2009-10/txt/msg00023.txt.bz2 > Eg. this one: > http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-09/msg00585.html There is a misunderstanding. Your patch was reviewed, and approved, but *you* either have to commit it, or ask someone to commit it for you. If you have an FSF assignment on file for GDB, then it's preferable for you to get write access to the GDB repository. > and this one: > http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-09/msg00556.html > > But I presume, I can consider the later one to be rejected - This > doesn't help anybody, but ... you want it this way, so be it. The patch looked suspicious when I looked at it, which is why I said that I didn't understand what it was doing. I prefer to not apply any change that I don't understand. -- Joel