[Postmaster@ali.com.tw: ¶Ç°e¥¢±Ñ: Error delivering to CNALINM3/ALI_SHA/ACER MAIL\0109501; 26:AA]

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>]

[Is overseers also responsible for list management or should I be using
gdb-owner?]

If it's obvious what subscribed address this is, could we get him
removed from the gdb@ list?

----- Forwarded message from Postmaster at ali dot com dot tw -----

Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 19:04:14 +0000
From: Postmaster at ali dot com dot tw
Subject: ¶Ç°e¥¢±Ñ: Error delivering to CNALINM3/ALI_SHA/ACER MAIL\0109501; 26:AA
To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>
Cc: gdb at sources dot redhat dot com

?z???T??

  ?D??: Re: "gdb_XXX.h" include files

?S?????e??:

  zcai at ali dot com dot tw

?]??:

  Error delivering to CNALINM3/ALI_SHA/ACER MAIL\0109501; 26:AA


Reporting-MTA: x-local-hostname; ACER

Final-Recipient: rfc822;zcai at ali dot com dot tw
Action: failed
Status: 5.0.0
Diagnostic-Code: X-Notes;Error delivering to CNALINM3/ALI_SHA/ACER MAIL\0109501; 26:AA

Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 19:04:14 +0000
From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>
Subject: Re: "gdb_XXX.h" include files
To: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at redhat dot com>
Cc: gdb at sources dot redhat dot com



On Mon, Mar 03, 2003 at 01:52:41PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> >Andrew, per an earlier conversation, you said this:
> >
> >
> >>I think it would be easier to just clarify the guidelines for
> >>``gdb_XXXX.h'' files - that they be independant as they are included by
> >>GDB and friends.
> >
> >
> >How'd you feel about documenting this in gdbint.texinfo?  Good idea, bad
> >idea?
>
> Pointer to original thread?

I was quoting:
  http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2002-07/msg00162.html

Started here:
  http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2002-06/msg00564.html

--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer



----- End forwarded message -----

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer