* GDB 9.1 release 2019-12-23 update @ 2019-12-23 9:30 Joel Brobecker 2019-12-23 14:14 ` Eli Zaretskii ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Joel Brobecker @ 2019-12-23 9:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gdb-patches; +Cc: Eli Zaretskii Hi everyone, So, as far as I know, the only issues that are still open are the issues that Eli found with the pre-release. - [EliZ] readline/colors.c build failure Caused by S_IXGRP and S_IXOTH not being defined on MinGW. Patch sent to readline, and should be applied to our local tree soon. - [EliZ] configure warning when checking for pthread-config Problem understood, but EliZ blocked because he doesn't have the correct auto-tools version. Hopefully building those from source is an option. - [Eliz] libtcf fails to build on MinGW https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25155 Problem reported to binutils on Dec 17th, but so far no answer as far as I can tell. https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2019-12/msg00277.html If we don't get an answer after the end of year holidays, I suggest we send in a patch, which will likely help move things along. From Eli's message on bugzilla, we shouldn't be far from having one. There might also be an issue with GDB/TUI, but that's less clear at this stage. Are there other issues that I may have missed for which we should wait until we can release GDB 9.1? Thank you! -- Joel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: GDB 9.1 release 2019-12-23 update 2019-12-23 9:30 GDB 9.1 release 2019-12-23 update Joel Brobecker @ 2019-12-23 14:14 ` Eli Zaretskii 2019-12-23 14:32 ` Eli Zaretskii 2019-12-24 3:47 ` Joel Brobecker 2019-12-25 21:36 ` Andrew Burgess 2019-12-28 16:22 ` Hannes Domani via gdb-patches 2 siblings, 2 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2019-12-23 14:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joel Brobecker; +Cc: gdb-patches > Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2019 13:30:31 +0400 > From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com> > Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> > > So, as far as I know, the only issues that are still open are > the issues that Eli found with the pre-release. Sorry about that. > - [EliZ] readline/colors.c build failure > > Caused by S_IXGRP and S_IXOTH not being defined on MinGW. > Patch sent to readline, and should be applied to our local > tree soon. Will do soon. > - [EliZ] configure warning when checking for pthread-config > > Problem understood, but EliZ blocked because he doesn't have > the correct auto-tools version. Hopefully building those > from source is an option. I believe this was already fixed. > - [Eliz] libtcf fails to build on MinGW > https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25155 > > Problem reported to binutils on Dec 17th, but so far > no answer as far as I can tell. > https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2019-12/msg00277.html > > If we don't get an answer after the end of year holidays, > I suggest we send in a patch, which will likely help move > things along. From Eli's message on bugzilla, we shouldn't > be far from having one. I already have a patch, so I can apply it whenever you say so. > Are there other issues that I may have missed for which we should > wait until we can release GDB 9.1? What about the compilation warning in record-btrace.c I reported in https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2019-12/msg00706.html? Do we want to fix it? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: GDB 9.1 release 2019-12-23 update 2019-12-23 14:14 ` Eli Zaretskii @ 2019-12-23 14:32 ` Eli Zaretskii 2019-12-24 3:47 ` Joel Brobecker 1 sibling, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2019-12-23 14:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: brobecker; +Cc: gdb-patches > Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2019 16:13:47 +0200 > From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> > CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org > > > - [EliZ] readline/colors.c build failure > > > > Caused by S_IXGRP and S_IXOTH not being defined on MinGW. > > Patch sent to readline, and should be applied to our local > > tree soon. > > Will do soon. Done. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: GDB 9.1 release 2019-12-23 update 2019-12-23 14:14 ` Eli Zaretskii 2019-12-23 14:32 ` Eli Zaretskii @ 2019-12-24 3:47 ` Joel Brobecker 2019-12-24 12:24 ` Andrew Burgess 2019-12-24 16:21 ` Eli Zaretskii 1 sibling, 2 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Joel Brobecker @ 2019-12-24 3:47 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: gdb-patches > > So, as far as I know, the only issues that are still open are > > the issues that Eli found with the pre-release. > > Sorry about that. Not your fault! > > - [EliZ] readline/colors.c build failure > > > > Caused by S_IXGRP and S_IXOTH not being defined on MinGW. > > Patch sent to readline, and should be applied to our local > > tree soon. > > Will do soon. Nice. > > - [EliZ] configure warning when checking for pthread-config > > > > Problem understood, but EliZ blocked because he doesn't have > > the correct auto-tools version. Hopefully building those > > from source is an option. > > I believe this was already fixed. Double Nice. > > - [Eliz] libtcf fails to build on MinGW > > https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25155 > > > > Problem reported to binutils on Dec 17th, but so far > > no answer as far as I can tell. > > https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2019-12/msg00277.html > > > > If we don't get an answer after the end of year holidays, > > I suggest we send in a patch, which will likely help move > > things along. From Eli's message on bugzilla, we shouldn't > > be far from having one. > > I already have a patch, so I can apply it whenever you say so. Let's try to have it reviewed by the binutils folks if we can. It seems relatively straightforward, but I tend to avoid fixing things in a branch before it gets fixed in master. Maybe send the patch to binutils with an RFA? If that doesn't work, then we'll consider the option of just patching our branch so we can release. > > Are there other issues that I may have missed for which we should > > wait until we can release GDB 9.1? > > What about the compilation warning in record-btrace.c I reported in > https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2019-12/msg00706.html? Do we > want to fix it? We can, but (IMO) not super critical. FWIW, I don't get the warning when buidling on GNU/Linux. -- Joel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: GDB 9.1 release 2019-12-23 update 2019-12-24 3:47 ` Joel Brobecker @ 2019-12-24 12:24 ` Andrew Burgess 2019-12-24 15:52 ` Eli Zaretskii 2020-01-03 16:21 ` Tom Tromey 2019-12-24 16:21 ` Eli Zaretskii 1 sibling, 2 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Andrew Burgess @ 2019-12-24 12:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joel Brobecker; +Cc: Eli Zaretskii, gdb-patches * Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com> [2019-12-24 07:46:52 +0400]: > > > So, as far as I know, the only issues that are still open are > > > the issues that Eli found with the pre-release. > > > > Sorry about that. > > Not your fault! > > > > - [EliZ] readline/colors.c build failure > > > > > > Caused by S_IXGRP and S_IXOTH not being defined on MinGW. > > > Patch sent to readline, and should be applied to our local > > > tree soon. > > > > Will do soon. > > Nice. > > > > - [EliZ] configure warning when checking for pthread-config > > > > > > Problem understood, but EliZ blocked because he doesn't have > > > the correct auto-tools version. Hopefully building those > > > from source is an option. > > > > I believe this was already fixed. > > Double Nice. > > > > - [Eliz] libtcf fails to build on MinGW > > > https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25155 > > > > > > Problem reported to binutils on Dec 17th, but so far > > > no answer as far as I can tell. > > > https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2019-12/msg00277.html > > > > > > If we don't get an answer after the end of year holidays, > > > I suggest we send in a patch, which will likely help move > > > things along. From Eli's message on bugzilla, we shouldn't > > > be far from having one. > > > > I already have a patch, so I can apply it whenever you say so. > > Let's try to have it reviewed by the binutils folks if we can. > It seems relatively straightforward, but I tend to avoid fixing > things in a branch before it gets fixed in master. Maybe send > the patch to binutils with an RFA? If that doesn't work, then > we'll consider the option of just patching our branch so > we can release. > > > > Are there other issues that I may have missed for which we should > > > wait until we can release GDB 9.1? > > > > What about the compilation warning in record-btrace.c I reported in > > https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2019-12/msg00706.html? Do we > > want to fix it? > > We can, but (IMO) not super critical. FWIW, I don't get the warning > when buidling on GNU/Linux. I can reproduce the warning on GNU/Linux, but it only crops up at some optimisation levels, -O0 doesn't warn for me, while -O1 and -O2 do. I've tested with GCC 8.3, 9.2, and a 10.??. This is all on a Fedora 27 system (yes, I really should update). That said, I had a look at the code in question and I suspect the warning is incorrect, unless I'm missing some clever C++ corner case, which is quite possible. So, we have one of these: gdb::optional<ui_out_emit_list> asm_list; The "uninitialised" variable is a member of the ui_out_emit_list, being used during its destructor. But the destructor is only called if the ui_out_emit_list is initialised, which requires the member variable to be set.... Currently I would be happy to release with the warning present. Thanks, Andrew ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: GDB 9.1 release 2019-12-23 update 2019-12-24 12:24 ` Andrew Burgess @ 2019-12-24 15:52 ` Eli Zaretskii 2020-01-03 16:21 ` Tom Tromey 1 sibling, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2019-12-24 15:52 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Burgess; +Cc: brobecker, gdb-patches > Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2019 12:23:54 +0000 > From: Andrew Burgess <andrew.burgess@embecosm.com> > Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, gdb-patches@sourceware.org > > > > What about the compilation warning in record-btrace.c I reported in > > > https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2019-12/msg00706.html? Do we > > > want to fix it? > > > > We can, but (IMO) not super critical. FWIW, I don't get the warning > > when buidling on GNU/Linux. > > I can reproduce the warning on GNU/Linux, but it only crops up at some > optimisation levels, -O0 doesn't warn for me, while -O1 and -O2 do. > I've tested with GCC 8.3, 9.2, and a 10.??. This is all on a Fedora > 27 system (yes, I really should update). FTR, my GCC version is 8.3, and I did use -O2 optimizations. Thanks. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: GDB 9.1 release 2019-12-23 update 2019-12-24 12:24 ` Andrew Burgess 2019-12-24 15:52 ` Eli Zaretskii @ 2020-01-03 16:21 ` Tom Tromey 1 sibling, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Tom Tromey @ 2020-01-03 16:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Burgess; +Cc: Joel Brobecker, Eli Zaretskii, gdb-patches >>>>> "Andrew" == Andrew Burgess <andrew.burgess@embecosm.com> writes: Andrew> That said, I had a look at the code in question and I suspect the Andrew> warning is incorrect, unless I'm missing some clever C++ corner case, Andrew> which is quite possible. So, we have one of these: Andrew> gdb::optional<ui_out_emit_list> asm_list; Andrew> The "uninitialised" variable is a member of the ui_out_emit_list, Andrew> being used during its destructor. But the destructor is only called Andrew> if the ui_out_emit_list is initialised, which requires the member Andrew> variable to be set.... Andrew> Currently I would be happy to release with the warning present. You didn't miss anything. This is just a bug in gcc (IMO). There's a discussion here: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80635 Tom ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: GDB 9.1 release 2019-12-23 update 2019-12-24 3:47 ` Joel Brobecker 2019-12-24 12:24 ` Andrew Burgess @ 2019-12-24 16:21 ` Eli Zaretskii 2019-12-26 22:40 ` Christian Biesinger via gdb-patches 1 sibling, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2019-12-24 16:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joel Brobecker; +Cc: gdb-patches > Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2019 07:46:52 +0400 > From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com> > Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org > > > > - [Eliz] libtcf fails to build on MinGW > > > https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25155 > > > > > > Problem reported to binutils on Dec 17th, but so far > > > no answer as far as I can tell. > > > https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2019-12/msg00277.html > > > > > > If we don't get an answer after the end of year holidays, > > > I suggest we send in a patch, which will likely help move > > > things along. From Eli's message on bugzilla, we shouldn't > > > be far from having one. > > > > I already have a patch, so I can apply it whenever you say so. > > Let's try to have it reviewed by the binutils folks if we can. > It seems relatively straightforward, but I tend to avoid fixing > things in a branch before it gets fixed in master. Maybe send > the patch to binutils with an RFA? If that doesn't work, then > we'll consider the option of just patching our branch so > we can release. I added an attachment with the patch to the Bugzilla report, it should appear shortly on the bug-binutils mailing list. Let's see what happens next. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: GDB 9.1 release 2019-12-23 update 2019-12-24 16:21 ` Eli Zaretskii @ 2019-12-26 22:40 ` Christian Biesinger via gdb-patches 2019-12-27 7:49 ` Eli Zaretskii 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Christian Biesinger via gdb-patches @ 2019-12-26 22:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: Joel Brobecker, gdb-patches On Tue, Dec 24, 2019 at 5:21 PM Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote: > > > Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2019 07:46:52 +0400 > > From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com> > > Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org > > > > > > - [Eliz] libtcf fails to build on MinGW > > > > https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25155 > > > > > > > > Problem reported to binutils on Dec 17th, but so far > > > > no answer as far as I can tell. > > > > https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2019-12/msg00277.html > > > > > > > > If we don't get an answer after the end of year holidays, > > > > I suggest we send in a patch, which will likely help move > > > > things along. From Eli's message on bugzilla, we shouldn't > > > > be far from having one. > > > > > > I already have a patch, so I can apply it whenever you say so. > > > > Let's try to have it reviewed by the binutils folks if we can. > > It seems relatively straightforward, but I tend to avoid fixing > > things in a branch before it gets fixed in master. Maybe send > > the patch to binutils with an RFA? If that doesn't work, then > > we'll consider the option of just patching our branch so > > we can release. > > I added an attachment with the patch to the Bugzilla report, it should > appear shortly on the bug-binutils mailing list. Let's see what > happens next. I don't know how binutils works, but if they work like gdb, it may be worth sending the patch to the binutils mailing list directly instead of relying on people to read bug-binutils? Christian ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: GDB 9.1 release 2019-12-23 update 2019-12-26 22:40 ` Christian Biesinger via gdb-patches @ 2019-12-27 7:49 ` Eli Zaretskii 0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2019-12-27 7:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christian Biesinger; +Cc: brobecker, gdb-patches > From: Christian Biesinger <cbiesinger@google.com> > Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2019 23:39:36 +0100 > Cc: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>, gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org> > > > I added an attachment with the patch to the Bugzilla report, it should > > appear shortly on the bug-binutils mailing list. Let's see what > > happens next. > > I don't know how binutils works, but if they work like gdb, it may be > worth sending the patch to the binutils mailing list directly instead > of relying on people to read bug-binutils? I'm fine with that, but if they don't read bug-binutils, then why does that list even exist? I actually suggest that Joel or Pedro post to the binutils mailing list quoting the Bugzilla report and/or the bug-binutils messages https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-binutils/2019-11/msg00006.html https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-binutils/2019-12/msg00162.html and telling the Binutils folks that this currently blocks a GDB release. I think this would have a much more profound effect than me doing the same. Or we could make the release regardless of the libctf issues with MinGW. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: GDB 9.1 release 2019-12-23 update 2019-12-23 9:30 GDB 9.1 release 2019-12-23 update Joel Brobecker 2019-12-23 14:14 ` Eli Zaretskii @ 2019-12-25 21:36 ` Andrew Burgess 2020-01-02 10:56 ` Joel Brobecker 2019-12-28 16:22 ` Hannes Domani via gdb-patches 2 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Andrew Burgess @ 2019-12-25 21:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joel Brobecker; +Cc: gdb-patches, Eli Zaretskii * Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com> [2019-12-23 13:30:31 +0400]: > Are there other issues that I may have missed for which we should > wait until we can release GDB 9.1? We might want to consider waiting for a fix for this issue: https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2019-12/msg01007.html If nobody else beats me to it then I'll get a fix for this in the next couple of days. Thanks, Andrew ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: GDB 9.1 release 2019-12-23 update 2019-12-25 21:36 ` Andrew Burgess @ 2020-01-02 10:56 ` Joel Brobecker 2020-01-06 22:00 ` Andrew Burgess 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Joel Brobecker @ 2020-01-02 10:56 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Burgess; +Cc: gdb-patches, Eli Zaretskii Hi Andrew, > We might want to consider waiting for a fix for this issue: > > https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2019-12/msg01007.html > > If nobody else beats me to it then I'll get a fix for this in the next > couple of days. Thanks for the heads up on that one. I agree we should wait for it to be fixed before we release. I'm adding it to the list! -- Joel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: GDB 9.1 release 2019-12-23 update 2020-01-02 10:56 ` Joel Brobecker @ 2020-01-06 22:00 ` Andrew Burgess 0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Andrew Burgess @ 2020-01-06 22:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joel Brobecker; +Cc: gdb-patches * Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com> [2020-01-02 14:56:45 +0400]: > Hi Andrew, > > > We might want to consider waiting for a fix for this issue: > > > > https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2019-12/msg01007.html > > > > If nobody else beats me to it then I'll get a fix for this in the next > > couple of days. > > Thanks for the heads up on that one. I agree we should wait for it > to be fixed before we release. I'm adding it to the list! I pushed the fix for this issue to master and gdb-9-branch. Thanks, Andrew ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: GDB 9.1 release 2019-12-23 update 2019-12-23 9:30 GDB 9.1 release 2019-12-23 update Joel Brobecker 2019-12-23 14:14 ` Eli Zaretskii 2019-12-25 21:36 ` Andrew Burgess @ 2019-12-28 16:22 ` Hannes Domani via gdb-patches 2 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Hannes Domani via gdb-patches @ 2019-12-28 16:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Gdb-patches Am Montag, 23. Dezember 2019, 10:30:53 MEZ hat Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com> Folgendes geschrieben: > Are there other issues that I may have missed for which we should > wait until we can release GDB 9.1? What about the patch to disable _FORTIFY_SOURCE on mingw?: https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2019-12/msg00787.html Otherwise you can't use a recent mingw-w64-gcc to build gdb at all. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-01-06 22:00 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 14+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2019-12-23 9:30 GDB 9.1 release 2019-12-23 update Joel Brobecker 2019-12-23 14:14 ` Eli Zaretskii 2019-12-23 14:32 ` Eli Zaretskii 2019-12-24 3:47 ` Joel Brobecker 2019-12-24 12:24 ` Andrew Burgess 2019-12-24 15:52 ` Eli Zaretskii 2020-01-03 16:21 ` Tom Tromey 2019-12-24 16:21 ` Eli Zaretskii 2019-12-26 22:40 ` Christian Biesinger via gdb-patches 2019-12-27 7:49 ` Eli Zaretskii 2019-12-25 21:36 ` Andrew Burgess 2020-01-02 10:56 ` Joel Brobecker 2020-01-06 22:00 ` Andrew Burgess 2019-12-28 16:22 ` Hannes Domani via gdb-patches
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).