From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <binutils-return-42936-listarch-binutils=sources.redhat.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 3221 invoked by alias); 27 Sep 2005 08:39:41 -0000
Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:binutils-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/>
List-Post: <mailto:binutils@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:binutils-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: binutils-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 3204 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Sep 2005 08:39:36 -0000
Received: from public.id2-vpn.continvity.gns.novell.com (HELO emea1-mh.id2.novell.com) (195.33.99.129)
    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Tue, 27 Sep 2005 08:39:36 +0000
Received: from EMEA1-MTA by emea1-mh.id2.novell.com
	with Novell_GroupWise; Tue, 27 Sep 2005 09:39:34 +0200
Message-Id: <433921B1.76F0.0078.0@novell.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 09:51:00 -0000
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@novell.com>
To: <binutils@sourceware.org>
Subject: patch ping
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-SW-Source: 2005-09/txt/msg00294.txt.bz2

These two patches were submitted four weeks ago:

http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2005-08/msg00431.html 
http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2005-08/msg00433.html 

and these two two weeks ago:

http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2005-09/msg00135.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2005-09/msg00136.html

Would anyone please check these and let me know if there's anything
wrong with them? Three of them specifically deal with x86-64 behavior,
and it appears to be a recurring problem that patches for this
architecture don't get reviewed...

Thanks, Jan