From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-323273-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 29915 invoked by alias); 26 Jul 2012 00:03:34 -0000
Received: (qmail 29903 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Jul 2012 00:03:33 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-51.7 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from ainaz.pair.com (HELO ainaz.pair.com) (209.68.2.66)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 26 Jul 2012 00:03:21 +0000
Received: from [192.168.0.129] (vie-188-118-248-247.dsl.sil.at [188.118.248.247])	by ainaz.pair.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E6C443F410;	Wed, 25 Jul 2012 20:03:19 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 00:03:00 -0000
From: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald@pfeifer.com>
To: Tristan Gingold <gingold@adacore.com>
cc: GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [Patch/RFC] SEH exceptions for Win64
In-Reply-To: <138BD038-E661-4916-B9BC-195C5406A153@adacore.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1207260202080.2303@gerinyyl.fvgr>
References: <17C1EDE6-6479-4C93-AD30-1930864B3729@adacore.com> <50044132.60906@redhat.com> <66B66CEA-F2C6-4838-B5EB-62963E52C7DF@adacore.com> <50055D09.5000205@redhat.com> <CAEwic4bvhK1CV5Vjc_m2ukzQ9ZhHWR1QXN1qucAAaf+=Zhqyww@mail.gmail.com> <13AC40A8-4532-44C5-8DC1-617C6DEEABA7@adacore.com> <5007D571.4050008@redhat.com> <76DF26FA-6064-401C-8EF3-0D80FFE18DAA@adacore.com> <138BD038-E661-4916-B9BC-195C5406A153@adacore.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2012-07/txt/msg01310.txt.bz2

On Wed, 25 Jul 2012, Tristan Gingold wrote:
> it is ok ?

Two minor changes, fine to commit with those.

 1. Full stop at the end of the sentence.
 2. Avoid extra <ul>...</ul> pair, rather add this to the existing.

Thanks,
Gerald