Hi Maurizio, thanks for the detailed report and all the patches. I am starting to go through them right now.
Independant of the bug fixes themselves, whichare very much appreciated (nobody tried gcc-3.0 on the Hurd yet, and we are happy you have taken the initiative), I would like to ask you to watch out for a couple of things on your next bug report. We have a strong preference for unified context diffs (-u), and it's also nice to see the function which is changed (-p), although that's not important. Some patches of you remove ^L characters in the code, but they should not be removed. We put them intentionally there to seperate logical components of one file according to the GNU coding standard (info standards). Similar changes can be combined to one patch file, there is no need to seperate them into many files, although in this case I am happy to see the compiler message along with the patch. But you should not gzip patches, unless they are very large. It's your choice if you attach them or include them into the message, although there is a preference to have patches inside the message and not as attachment. For each change, you should write a ChangeLog entry in the format we use in our changelog entries. (Date, two spaces, Name, two spaces, <email>, empty line, tab, * FILE (FUNCTION): DESCRIPTION). This changelog entry should not be a patch to the ChangeLog file, but just copied into the message. This allows us to see what your changes do without reading that from the patch itself, and allows us to include it in the ChangeLog. (A patch to ChangeLog has a high chance to conflict with other peoples changes). Looking forward to your next patch (and going back to the ones supplied)! Thanks, Marcus -- `Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' Debian http://www.debian.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] Marcus Brinkmann GNU http://www.gnu.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.marcus-brinkmann.de _______________________________________________ Bug-hurd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
