From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7212 invoked by alias); 10 Oct 2014 21:58:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 7201 invoked by uid 89); 10 Oct 2014 21:58:18 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 10 Oct 2014 21:58:17 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s9ALwGRu011308 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 10 Oct 2014 17:58:16 -0400 Received: from stumpy.slc.redhat.com (ovpn-113-95.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.95]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s9ALwFGw024550; Fri, 10 Oct 2014 17:58:15 -0400 Message-ID: <54385676.4000004@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2014 22:31:00 -0000 From: Jeff Law User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Phil Muldoon CC: Tom Tromey , tom@tromey.com, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] add libcc1 References: <1400254001-12038-1-git-send-email-tromey@redhat.com> <87oayx4l0x.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <87bntobp1f.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <53D9CA7B.3040709@redhat.com> <5436504B.8060902@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <5436504B.8060902@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-10/txt/msg01029.txt.bz2 On 10/09/14 03:07, Phil Muldoon wrote: > > Sorry for taking so long to reply. We've talked, on irc and elsewhere > a little (some at the Cauldron too!). I think the consensus is as > nobody has explicitly mentioned anything, this is OK to go in? Yes, please go ahead and check it in. You'll be the first contact point if something goes wrong :-) Given the length of time since the original post and now, can you please do sanity bootstrap to make sure nothing's bitrotted before you commit? > >> Does this deserve a mention in the news file? > > I am not sure. All the interface to this is really through GDB. > I'll let someone else tell me yes or no for news. The patch set I have on my > desk is ready to go, and I believe all alterations have been approved > in previous email threads. > I think someone mentioned it really deserved a news file mention in gdb's new file rather than gcc's. That makes sense to me. jeff