From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-156911-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 16776 invoked by alias); 29 Sep 2009 22:08:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 16749 invoked by uid 22791); 29 Sep 2009 22:08:04 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (HELO vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at) (128.131.111.2)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 22:07:59 +0000
Received: from acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at [128.131.111.60]) 	by vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C7031E07A; 	Wed, 30 Sep 2009 00:07:53 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Postfix, from userid 1203) 	id 042731005D; Wed, 30 Sep 2009 00:07:57 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) 	by acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3DA510059; 	Wed, 30 Sep 2009 00:07:57 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 22:59:00 -0000
From: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald@pfeifer.com>
To: Dave Korn <dave.korn.cygwin@googlemail.com>
cc: Richard Guenther <rguenther@suse.de>, gcc@gcc.gnu.org,      libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: GCC 4.5 Status Report (2009-09-19)
In-Reply-To: <4AC27D21.6020905@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.1.99.0909300005190.899@acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at>
References: <alpine.LNX.2.00.0909192244530.4520@zhemvz.fhfr.qr> <4AC27D21.6020905@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 1.99 (LSU 1142 2008-08-13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2009-09/txt/msg00620.txt.bz2

On Tue, 29 Sep 2009, Dave Korn wrote:
> We have ~48 hours left for stage 1 and I can't be confident of getting 
> it reviewed in the remaining time, so I'd like to make a special 
> request: can you, as RM, please say that this is OK in principle and 
> that if I can get v3 approval (it already has all other necessary 
> approvals) I can check it in during stage 3 before we branch?

Historically I think we have been flexible for patches that have been
submitted during stage 1.

Now, submitting a one liner as your first attempt at a new pass today
and then claiming the rest are just fixes, would be a stretch :-), but
for a patch like yours it does not seem unreasonable.

Gerald