From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26353 invoked by alias); 19 Sep 2003 22:16:35 -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 26343 invoked from network); 19 Sep 2003 22:16:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO zenia.home) (12.223.225.216) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 19 Sep 2003 22:16:35 -0000 Received: by zenia.home (Postfix, from userid 5433) id E45172075A; Fri, 19 Sep 2003 17:13:44 -0500 (EST) To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: macros/726: Internal GDB errors with current GDB snapshots and -gdwarf2-3 References: <200309192212.h8JMCdfS021605@duracef.shout.net> From: Jim Blandy Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 22:16:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <200309192212.h8JMCdfS021605@duracef.shout.net> Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2003-09/txt/msg00248.txt.bz2 This points out an interesting issue. I can attach a patch to a PR in two ways, neither of which are really satisfactory: - I can attach the patch directly to the PR, which causes GNATS to generate E-mail messages that refer to "attachments" that are not present in the message. - Or, if I'm replying to a PRMS message, I can attach the patch to the message, which results in the patch not appearing as an attachment to the PR itself. Hmph. I could always just do both, I suppose.