Re: Some 'type' bug found and patched

[Marcus Brinkmann]

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 brinkmd@debian.org
Marcus Brinkmann              GNU    http://www.gnu.org    marcus@gnu.org
Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de
http://www.marcus-brinkmann.de