This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: RFC: branching for GDB 7.11 soon? (possibly Wed)
- From: Keith Seitz <keiths at redhat dot com>
- To: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Cc: Joel Brobecker <brobecker at adacore dot com>
- Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2016 14:37:25 -0800
- Subject: Re: RFC: branching for GDB 7.11 soon? (possibly Wed)
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20160201030638 dot GG4008 at adacore dot com> <20160207081230 dot GA20874 at adacore dot com> <20160209115617 dot GG15342 at adacore dot com> <56B9DD81 dot 5030606 at redhat dot com>
On 02/09/2016 04:37 AM, Pedro Alves wrote:
> On 02/09/2016 11:56 AM, Joel Brobecker wrote:
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> Once again, I am very grateful to everyone who is so responsive
>> in trying to help us create that branch!
>>
>> Quick status update again, based on the latest feedback:
>>
>>>> PR19506 Regression with gdb.Breakpoint("*<addr>")
>>>
>>> This lead to a wider fix:
>>> [PATCH V2 0/4] Add support for "legacy" linespecs
>>> https://www.sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-02/msg00024.html
>>
>> I took a look over the weekend, and it seems fairly unintrusive.
>> I propose we push it now. Otherwise, I think it's safe to create
>> the branch before pushing this patch, and backport afterwards.
>
> I took a quick look and it looks fine to me too.
Well, that's two global maintainers who think it looks okay; I've pushed
this.
>>> There is also a crash (regression):
>>>
>>> PR 19546 - gdb crash calling exec in the inferior
>>> Initial guestimate from Pedro:
>>> | Looks like a regression of the explicit locations work.
>>> Still in Pedro's court, or could Keith help?
>>
>> Looks like the fix is fairly straightforward.
>>
Patch submitted:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-02/msg00245.html
Keith