This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH v6 00/15] Please have a final look
- From: Keith Seitz <keiths at redhat dot com>
- To: Joel Brobecker <brobecker at adacore dot com>
- Cc: "Agovic, Sanimir" <sanimir dot agovic at intel dot com>, "gdb-patches at sourceware dot org" <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 13:33:17 -0700
- Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 00/15] Please have a final look
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1397133617-26681-1-git-send-email-sanimir dot agovic at intel dot com> <20140410143915 dot GD15965 at adacore dot com> <0377C58828D86C4588AEEC42FC3B85A71D84FE7A at IRSMSX105 dot ger dot corp dot intel dot com> <53483E24 dot 5060302 at redhat dot com> <20140411202747 dot GN4250 at adacore dot com>
On 04/11/2014 01:27 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote:
Thank you Joel for helping me out through the patch series! I just
committed the patches including the final adjustments.
Unfortunatley, this patchset has regressed the following tests:
Argh! Sorry about that, and thanks for the heads up, Keith.
Not a problem -- I was just about to commit some patches -- one of which
touches some bits of this patch set and noticed that a clean update/test
had a few more FAILs than I expected. [We all keep a mental count of the
"normal" number of FAILs on our systems, right? ;-)]
I'm doing a quick round of testing with what's left of my day today,
but we might have to revert the patch series to allow us more time
to investigate.
Would you like me to hold off on committing my c++/16675 patchset? That
touches eval.c:evaluate_subexp_for_sizeof. It's not a huge deal IMO. A
Most of the "conflict" is simply that I chose to refactor this function
a little. [i.e., remove all the "return value_from_longest" and collect
them at the end of the function]
How come this didn't show up in Sanimir's testing?
I don't know. Maybe my sandbox is messed up? It *is* Friday afterall! :-)
Keith