From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <java-patches-return-19034-listarch-java-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 31344 invoked by alias); 28 Jan 2008 10:23:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 31326 invoked by uid 22791); 28 Jan 2008 10:23:50 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 10:23:33 +0000
Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) 	by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m0SANUf7008694; 	Mon, 28 Jan 2008 05:23:30 -0500
Received: from [10.11.14.4] (vpn-14-4.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.14.4]) 	by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m0SANSUi031575; 	Mon, 28 Jan 2008 05:23:28 -0500
Message-ID: <479DAD20.5020006@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 10:23:00 -0000
From: Andrew Haley <aph@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.12 (X11/20071019)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: David Daney <ddaney@avtrex.com>
CC: java-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Gerald Pfeifer <gerald@pfeifer.com>,         Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libjava: Add option to disable BC ABI in libgcj.
References: <476C3D6A.6060704@avtrex.com> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0712301502360.25278@acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at> <479AC29F.9050909@avtrex.com> <479B1090.9090307@redhat.com> <479BAB00.2000202@avtrex.com> <479C5E29.6000607@redhat.com> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0801280104320.4453@acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at> <479D5C3B.9070900@avtrex.com>
In-Reply-To: <479D5C3B.9070900@avtrex.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact java-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <java-patches.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:java-patches-subscribe@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:java-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:java-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org>, <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: java-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2008-q1/txt/msg00042.txt.bz2

David Daney wrote:
> Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
>> On Sun, 27 Jan 2008, Andrew Haley wrote:
>>   
>>>> I don't think so, but I have a limited grasp of the English language.  I
>>>> will defer to others on which of 'affected' or 'effected' should be used
>>>> here.
>>>>       
>>> OK, so take it from me: it's "affected".
>>>     
>> ;-)  David, I assume Andrew is going to give the final Ack for the patch 
>> (or has done so already).  Just make sure you won't stall on me, I was 
>> mainly trying to give some feedback.
>>   
> OK.
> 
> Andrew, it's in your hands now.  How about this version?
> 
> The only change is to use 'affected' instead off 'effected'.
> 

OK!  It's OK, really!  Please don't ask again,  :-)

Cheers,
Andrew.