Re: [ PATCH 0/3] Fix GDB reverse execution behavior

[Guinevere Larsen <blarsen@redhat.com>]

On 30/11/2023 16:39, Carl Love wrote:
> Guinevere:
>
> On Thu, 2023-11-30 at 12:36 +0100, Guinevere Larsen wrote:
>> On a side note, b4 didn't really like this series and I'm not sure
>> why.
>> My guess is that all 3 patches have the same email subject, but it
>> may
>> also be that I needed --3way when using git am. Either way, just
>> mentioning to gather knowledge on what b4 likes or doesn't like.
>
> I am not familiar with b4.  I just did a Google search and found a
> description of it at:
>
> https://people.kernel.org/monsieuricon/introducing-b4-and-patch-attestation
>
> It seems to be a tool the maintainers can use for patch management. I
> will have to play around with it and see if I can figure out why b4
> doesn't like the patch series.
>
> Is this something that people have started using?
>
We started talking about this because it automatically collects the git 
trailers and applies them, so you wouldn't need to change your local 
commits, and makes it easy for reviewers.  Simon wrote some tips about 
using it in the wiki a little bit ago: 
https://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/DeveloperTips#Downloading_and_applying_patches_from_the_mailing_list

It's not required or anything, it's just handy.

I like to use it as "b4 shazam <message-id>" which would automatically 
apply the patches, not just download them. Maybe that's where it went 
wrong...

-- 
Cheers,
Guinevere Larsen
She/Her/Hers