On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 7:25 PM Florian Weimer <fweimer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Sorry, I still don't understand. You are quoting from my patch. Does
it follow the required style or not?
The following style is what we want for now. But if it is still not clear, we could help modify it. No worry about it, Florian.
...
return new_type
}
+--- gdb-10.2/bfd/elf-bfd.h.orig
++++ gdb-10.2/bfd/elf-bfd.h
+@@ -27,6 +27,8 @@
+ #include "elf/internal.h"
+ #include "bfdlink.h"
+
++#include <string.h>
++
}
+--- gdb-10.2/bfd/elf-bfd.h.orig
++++ gdb-10.2/bfd/elf-bfd.h
+@@ -27,6 +27,8 @@
+ #include "elf/internal.h"
+ #include "bfdlink.h"
+
++#include <string.h>
++
...
Could you make the required style changes yourself and push it?
I will test the patch first in the next two weeks and give you feedback.
Thanks.
Lianbo
Thanks,
Florian
-- Crash-utility mailing list Crash-utility@xxxxxxxxxx https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/crash-utility Contribution Guidelines: https://github.com/crash-utility/crash/wiki
