This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

RE: [PING] RE: [PATCH v2] Support structure offsets that are 512K bytes or larger.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yao Qi [mailto:qiyaoltc@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2016 3:56 AM
> To: taylor, david
> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> Subject: Re: [PING] RE: [PATCH v2] Support structure offsets that are 512K
> bytes or larger.
> 
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 2:17 PM, taylor, david <david.taylor@emc.com>
> wrote:
> > Ping.  Previous ping failed to add '[PING]' to subject line.
> 
> I reviewed the patch https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-
> 06/msg00194.html
> Please fix some nits in my review, and your patch can go in.
> 
> --
> Yao (éå)
HI Yao,

Thanks.  Your response on Friday never arrived in my mailbox.  A fair bit of gdb-patches
never makes it to my mailbox and I somehow missed your response when I checked
the mailing list archives before sending the ping.  Sorry.

I think that some messages get filtered based on size, but there seem to be other
criteria as well.  EMC's IT department is generally unhelpful.

The nits you point out are all easy to deal with.  One issue.  You say, in part:

> I rebuild native i686-w64-mingw32 gdb with your patch, the build is
> OK.  The patch is good to me, some nits below.  You can push it in if no
> other comments in 3~4 days.

I cannot push it as I do not have 'write after approval' status.

Should I port an updated version addressing the nits?  Or ...?


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]