From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 119395 invoked by alias); 24 Jun 2015 13:54:15 -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 119326 invoked by uid 89); 24 Jun 2015 13:54:13 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,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; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 13:54:13 +0000 Received: from int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.26]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 28C4D344F54; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 13:54:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t5ODsAk6010566; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 09:54:11 -0400 Message-ID: <558AB682.1090903@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 13:54:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Iain Buclaw CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] Sync libiberty with gcc upstream References: <558A95CE.2060506@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2015-06/txt/msg00528.txt.bz2 On 06/24/2015 02:52 PM, Iain Buclaw wrote: > On 24 June 2015 at 13:34, Pedro Alves wrote: >> On 06/19/2015 04:18 PM, Iain Buclaw wrote: >>> Belated attempt at downstreaming libiberty changes from upstream. >>> Split it into two patches, one with dlang related changes, the other >>> with everything else. >>> >>> As requested, commits have been replayed ontop of gdb rather than a >>> straight diff between the directories. >> >> Excellent, thanks. >> >> If we regenerate the affected configure files afterwards, do end up >> with no changes? If so, the two patches are OK. >> > > If by regenerating, you mean by using autoreconf2.64 on the toplevel > and libiberty directories, then yes no further changes crop up. Exactly. > >> I assume diffing the dirs still comes up empty after these? >> > > Diffing the libiberty directory between gcc and gdb comes up empty > after these, yes. Awesome. Many thanks for doing all this. Much appreciated. -- Pedro Alves