From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 123401 invoked by alias); 2 Jun 2015 13:46:35 -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 123391 invoked by uid 89); 2 Jun 2015 13:46:34 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail-pd0-f180.google.com Received: from mail-pd0-f180.google.com (HELO mail-pd0-f180.google.com) (209.85.192.180) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-GCM-SHA256 encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 02 Jun 2015 13:46:33 +0000 Received: by pdbnf5 with SMTP id nf5so72234966pdb.2 for ; Tue, 02 Jun 2015 06:46:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.68.131.41 with SMTP id oj9mr12900097pbb.39.1433252792188; Tue, 02 Jun 2015 06:46:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (gcc1-power7.osuosl.org. [140.211.15.137]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id le17sm8907951pab.2.2015.06.02.06.46.30 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 02 Jun 2015 06:46:31 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <556DB3B0.2000809@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2015 13:46:00 -0000 From: Yao Qi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Doug Evans CC: gdb-patches Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make file-based lookup more interruptable References: <089e0160b1be9352da05162640cb@google.com> <86382ssrx7.fsf@gmail.com> <556D6267.5080408@gmail.com> <556DAAD6.7030008@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-06/txt/msg00023.txt.bz2 On 02/06/15 14:20, Doug Evans wrote: > Eh? > I'm sorry but the difference is just lost on me. > > Ok, how about we add a rule saying that the addition of any calls to > QUIT shall require a NEWS entry. > [Since that is what you are requesting.] Hi Doug, I don't insist on adding a NEWS entry for this change. If it is not necessary to do so for you, I am OK too. The intention of my suggestion of adding NEWS entry for this change is to show the good improvements to users as much as we can. -- Yao (齐尧)