From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=UQYV=FL=gentoo.org=sam@sourceware.org>
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (dev.gentoo.org [IPv6:2001:470:ea4a:1:5054:ff:fec7:86e4])
	by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31FF93858436
	for <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>; Wed, 27 Sep 2023 07:36:08 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 31FF93858436
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gentoo.org
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gentoo.org
References: <20230912010238.3086346-1-sam@gentoo.org>
 <a359ca21-1940-4619-ac67-9dbfe49b84f4@suse.de> <87bkdp59la.fsf@tromey.com>
 <b5a49e8a-868d-4a7f-b4d8-e11effd2f102@suse.de>
User-agent: mu4e 1.10.6; emacs 30.0.50
From: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
To: Tom de Vries <tdevries@suse.de>
Cc: Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>, Tom de Vries via Gdb-patches
 <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>, Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>, Tom de Vries
 <vries@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gdb: Fix an ODR warning with byacc with GDB_YY_REMAP
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2023 08:35:38 +0100
Organization: Gentoo
In-reply-to: <b5a49e8a-868d-4a7f-b4d8-e11effd2f102@suse.de>
Message-ID: <87cyy4cbks.fsf@gentoo.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL,KAM_DMARC_STATUS,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>


Tom de Vries <tdevries@suse.de> writes:

> On 9/26/23 15:48, Tom Tromey wrote:
>>>>>>> "Tom" == Tom de Vries via Gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org> writes:
>> Tom> On 9/12/23 02:58, Sam James wrote:
>>>> - Tom commented that it probably constitutes obvious but while I
>>>> have binutils access, I'm not listed in gdb/MAINTAINERS for
>>>> write-after-approval, so I'm hesitant.
>> Tom> GDB write-after-approval requires a copyright assignment that
>> covers
>> Tom> gdb.  Do you have a copyright assignment for gdb?
>> I think this patch could land without the paperwork, since it is
>> small.
>
> Agreed, which is why I've already approved it and asked Sam to commit it.
>
>> And, it would be good to get it in before GDB 14, since it is a build
>> fix.
>
> Agreed.  Sam, is there anything preventing you from committing this?
> If so, then I can take care of it.

Sorry folks, done now - Tom's question had prompted me to go finally
figure out the copyright assignment bits and I got distracted.

Pushed!

>
> Thanks,
> - Tom

best,
sam