From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18181 invoked by alias); 26 Oct 2002 17:17:49 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 16058 invoked from network); 26 Oct 2002 17:16:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (24.112.240.27) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 26 Oct 2002 17:16:12 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2EFF3F3A; Sat, 26 Oct 2002 13:15:31 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3DBACDB3.4070603@redhat.com> Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2002 10:17:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020824 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com, kseitz@redhat.com, irox@redhat.com Subject: Re: Conflict markers in tcl/ChangeLog References: <20021026170532.GA8429@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-10/txt/msg00190.txt.bz2 > Are the conflict markers in tcl/ChangeLog really supposed to be there? They > were introduced in the 8.3 merge last September and have been sitting there > since. I was doing a branch merge for drow-cplus-branch today and noticed > them. Clearly they're intentional :-^. (It would be a straight foobar so if you wan't to pull them :-) Andrew