This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [commit] Move find_frame_addr_in_frame_chain() to varobj.c

From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at redhat dot com>
To: Michael Snyder <msnyder at redhat dot com>
Cc: gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 14:09:54 -0500
Subject: Re: [commit] Move find_frame_addr_in_frame_chain() to varobj.c
References: <3DE0DFD9.6090005@redhat.com> <3DE26F28.59C8E54B@redhat.com>

Say, is this a policy change?
Are we substituting [commit] for [PATCH]?

There isn't a policy.

People have observed though that `patch' is pretty ambigous - some people use it when subitting something for aproval, others when committing a patch, others ...

So I'm just trying to avoid it.

Andrew

References:
- [commit] Move find_frame_addr_in_frame_chain() to varobj.c
  - From: Andrew Cagney
- Re: [commit] Move find_frame_addr_in_frame_chain() to varobj.c
  - From: Michael Snyder

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]