From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48302) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WOQvJ-0000DY-I4 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 08:09:19 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WOQvC-0001ci-FT for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 08:09:13 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:58838) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WOQvC-0001ca-81 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 08:09:06 -0400 Message-ID: <1394798940.5732.15.camel@nilsson.home.kraxel.org> From: Gerd Hoffmann Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2014 13:09:00 +0100 In-Reply-To: <5322F026.10203@redhat.com> References: <1394790493.5732.5.camel@nilsson.home.kraxel.org> <5322F026.10203@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/7] gtk: A few bug fixes List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Cole Robinson Cc: Peter Maydell , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Anthony Liguori Hi, > Hmm, thanks for testing. I didn't notice the GDK_KEY_foo back compat defines > at the top of gtk.c, we need one for GDK_KEY_q as well. > > Would you prefer I wait until after 2.0 is out to resubmit the series? I don't mind much, do whatever works best for you. Most likely there are no conflicts (at least cherry-picking worked without manual invention), and I can let 'em sit in a branch for a while ... cheers, Gerd