On Nov 21, 2011, at 4:15 PM, Corey Ashford wrote:
> On 10/17/2011 05:52 AM, Greg Watson wrote:
>>> It's not clear to me why the PTP/RDT developers chose to use a separate
>>> project type "Remote C/C++ project" and introducing a different mechanism
>>> for choosing toolchains, instead of reusin
Created the bugzilla entry:
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=364420
Thanks,
Jessica
-Original Message-
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Andrew Overholt
Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 1:42 PM
To: Linux Tools d
Thanks Jessica, I'll fix it immediately.
-- Jeff J.
On 11/21/2011 04:35 PM, Zhang, Jessica wrote:
Hi Jeff,
While playing with remote valgrind against LinuxTools master branch, I found a
bug, since it's just a one liner and I'm not that familiar with LinuxTools
patch pull request process, so
Hi Jessica,
* Zhang, Jessica [2011-11-21 16:35]:
> While playing with remote valgrind against LinuxTools master branch, I
> found a bug, since it's just a one liner and I'm not that familiar
> with LinuxTools patch pull request process, so I'm pasting the patch
> below...
Thanks for the patch.
Hi Jeff,
While playing with remote valgrind against LinuxTools master branch, I found a
bug, since it's just a one liner and I'm not that familiar with LinuxTools
patch pull request process, so I'm pasting the patch below...
Thanks,
Jessica
-
This patch will fix th
On 10/17/2011 05:52 AM, Greg Watson wrote:
>> It's not clear to me why the PTP/RDT developers chose to use a separate
>> project type "Remote C/C++ project" and introducing a different mechanism
>> for choosing toolchains, instead of reusing the C/C++ project type. Maybe
>> Greg Watson can fill
The following is a rough agenda for today's call. If you would like to
add something to the list, let us know either now or during the meeting.
1. Introduction
- goals of remote tools work
- what we hope to accomplish at today's meeting
2. Model Details
- description of remote models
- i
