From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2423 invoked by alias); 19 Dec 2013 21:52:08 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 2413 invoked by uid 89); 19 Dec 2013 21:52:08 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl Received: from sibelius.xs4all.nl (HELO glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl) (83.163.83.176) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 21:52:07 +0000 Received: from glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl (kettenis@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.14.5/8.14.3) with ESMTP id rBJLprR0001530; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 22:51:53 +0100 (CET) Received: (from kettenis@localhost) by glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.14.5/8.14.3/Submit) id rBJLpr1i015135; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 22:51:53 +0100 (CET) Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 21:52:00 -0000 Message-Id: <201312192151.rBJLpr1i015135@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> From: Mark Kettenis To: hjl.tools@gmail.com CC: brobecker@adacore.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-reply-to: (hjl.tools@gmail.com) Subject: Re: GDB 7.7 branching on Monday? References: <20131219175908.GH3493@adacore.com> X-SW-Source: 2013-12/txt/msg00811.txt.bz2 > Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 10:06:36 -0800 > From: "H.J. Lu" > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 9:59 AM, Joel Brobecker wrote: > > Hello, > > > > I think the last known issue on the TODO list before branching > > (see TODO at https://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/GDB_7.7_Release) > > should be checked in today, or this weekend at the latest. > > > > Unless there are some other issues we haven't listed yet, I propose > > to create the branch on Monday morning. > > > > I have 4 patches I like to see in GDB 7.7: > > https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-12/msg00313.html This one is defenitely ok; thanks for revising it. The other three look reasonable, but I'm really not familliar enough with the instruction set to review these diffs. And I don't use that code myself. So you should probably just go ahead. Cheers, Mark