From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 50917 invoked by alias); 15 Jun 2015 15:07:11 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 50792 invoked by uid 89); 15 Jun 2015 15:07:10 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=no 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; Mon, 15 Jun 2015 15:07:10 +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 (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0FF0519F3BD; Mon, 15 Jun 2015 15:07:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from host1.jankratochvil.net (ovpn-116-41.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.41]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t5FF74Sq017412 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 15 Jun 2015 11:07:07 -0400 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2015 15:07:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Joel Brobecker Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Aleksandar Ristovski Subject: [commit] [PATCH v7 01/10] Move utility functions to common/ Message-ID: <20150615150704.GA30809@host1.jankratochvil.net> References: <20150614192542.18346.87859.stgit@host1.jankratochvil.net> <20150614192551.18346.67512.stgit@host1.jankratochvil.net> <20150615132250.GB25717@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150615132250.GB25717@adacore.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-06/txt/msg00311.txt.bz2 On Mon, 15 Jun 2015 15:22:50 +0200, Joel Brobecker wrote: > This one looks pretty straightfoward and useful, so OK. There were some discussions whether it should be checked in even without the further patches but I have therefore checked it in: 03aef70fecec83e109c65337a59600ad36def6bf > I *think* from reading through the patch that some of the functions > being moved don't have documentation. This is not for this patch, > but if you wouldn't mind, would you use this opportunity to add > that documentation as a followup patch? If you don't have the time, > then no problem, but do let me know so I can go in and do that. I can but not sure now, it could be assigned by Pedro. Jan