* start of the GDB 11 release cycle
@ 2021-05-10 0:04 Joel Brobecker
2021-05-10 3:20 ` Mike Frysinger
` (3 more replies)
0 siblings, 4 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Joel Brobecker @ 2021-05-10 0:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-patches
Hello,
It's been about 6.5 months since we made the first GDB 10 release (10.1).
So I propose we start the process of creating the GDB 11 release now.
As of now, below are the issues that I'm aware of:
* [Sergey with Simon as reviewer] <PR tdep/26633>
Add Z80 CPU support
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26633
Patch submitted at:
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2020-September/172083.html
* [AndrewB/Simon] <PR gdb/26819>
Bug 26819 - RISC-V: internal-error: int finish_step_over(execution_control_state*): Assertion
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26819
I think the situation has been improved thanks to a couple of
patches, but the user still has some scenarios where the issue
happens.
* [Simon] <PR gdb/26868>
Follow-up on x86-64 stub submission
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26868
This is the submission in question:
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2020-November/173182.html
* [Simon/Kevin] <PR gdb/27526>
Attaching to threaded process on glibc 2.33: libthread_db fails to initialize with "generic error"
Patch v2 at:
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2021-May/178485.html
Are there other issues or last minute features we'd like to include
before we branch and/or release?
Thank you!
--
Joel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: start of the GDB 11 release cycle
2021-05-10 0:04 start of the GDB 11 release cycle Joel Brobecker
@ 2021-05-10 3:20 ` Mike Frysinger
2021-05-10 22:10 ` Joel Brobecker
2021-05-24 19:40 ` Joel Brobecker
2021-05-10 3:52 ` Luis Machado
` (2 subsequent siblings)
3 siblings, 2 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Mike Frysinger @ 2021-05-10 3:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joel Brobecker; +Cc: gdb-patches
On 09 May 2021 17:04, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> Are there other issues or last minute features we'd like to include
> before we branch and/or release?
i have some patches pending for using gnulib in sim ... waiting on gcc side to
approve a top-level patch. they're not needed for up-to-date platforms, but
to fix builds for systems like Windows that don't fully support current POSIX.
-mike
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: start of the GDB 11 release cycle
2021-05-10 3:20 ` Mike Frysinger
@ 2021-05-10 22:10 ` Joel Brobecker
2021-05-24 19:40 ` Joel Brobecker
1 sibling, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Joel Brobecker @ 2021-05-10 22:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-patches
> > Are there other issues or last minute features we'd like to include
> > before we branch and/or release?
>
> i have some patches pending for using gnulib in sim ... waiting on gcc side to
> approve a top-level patch. they're not needed for up-to-date platforms, but
> to fix builds for systems like Windows that don't fully support current POSIX.
Understood. Please let me know when the patches are approved and in,
so I can scratch this one off the list.
--
Joel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: start of the GDB 11 release cycle
2021-05-10 3:20 ` Mike Frysinger
2021-05-10 22:10 ` Joel Brobecker
@ 2021-05-24 19:40 ` Joel Brobecker
2021-05-25 2:01 ` Mike Frysinger
1 sibling, 1 reply; 24+ messages in thread
From: Joel Brobecker @ 2021-05-24 19:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-patches
Hi Mike,
> On 09 May 2021 17:04, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> > Are there other issues or last minute features we'd like to include
> > before we branch and/or release?
>
> i have some patches pending for using gnulib in sim ... waiting on gcc
> side to approve a top-level patch. they're not needed for up-to-date
> platforms, but to fix builds for systems like Windows that don't fully
> support current POSIX.
How are we doing on this front? If you've posted patches, would
you mind giving me URLs, so I can follow their progress?
Thank you!
--
Joel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: start of the GDB 11 release cycle
2021-05-24 19:40 ` Joel Brobecker
@ 2021-05-25 2:01 ` Mike Frysinger
2021-05-26 22:03 ` Joel Brobecker
0 siblings, 1 reply; 24+ messages in thread
From: Mike Frysinger @ 2021-05-25 2:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joel Brobecker; +Cc: gdb-patches
On 24 May 2021 12:40, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> > On 09 May 2021 17:04, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> > > Are there other issues or last minute features we'd like to include
> > > before we branch and/or release?
> >
> > i have some patches pending for using gnulib in sim ... waiting on gcc
> > side to approve a top-level patch. they're not needed for up-to-date
> > platforms, but to fix builds for systems like Windows that don't fully
> > support current POSIX.
>
> How are we doing on this front? If you've posted patches, would
> you mind giving me URLs, so I can follow their progress?
i got some reviewed & merged yesterday & today. i'm down to the last:
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2021-May/179202.html
-mike
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: start of the GDB 11 release cycle
2021-05-10 0:04 start of the GDB 11 release cycle Joel Brobecker
2021-05-10 3:20 ` Mike Frysinger
@ 2021-05-10 3:52 ` Luis Machado
2021-05-10 22:11 ` Joel Brobecker
2021-05-24 19:42 ` Joel Brobecker
2021-05-10 5:52 ` Bernd Edlinger
2021-05-11 12:45 ` Rainer Orth
3 siblings, 2 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Luis Machado @ 2021-05-10 3:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joel Brobecker, gdb-patches
Hi Joel,
On 5/9/21 9:04 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> Hello,
>
> It's been about 6.5 months since we made the first GDB 10 release (10.1).
> So I propose we start the process of creating the GDB 11 release now.
>
> As of now, below are the issues that I'm aware of:
>
> * [Sergey with Simon as reviewer] <PR tdep/26633>
> Add Z80 CPU support
> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26633
>
> Patch submitted at:
> https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2020-September/172083.html
>
> * [AndrewB/Simon] <PR gdb/26819>
> Bug 26819 - RISC-V: internal-error: int finish_step_over(execution_control_state*): Assertion
> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26819
>
> I think the situation has been improved thanks to a couple of
> patches, but the user still has some scenarios where the issue
> happens.
>
> * [Simon] <PR gdb/26868>
> Follow-up on x86-64 stub submission
> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26868
>
> This is the submission in question:
> https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2020-November/173182.html
>
> * [Simon/Kevin] <PR gdb/27526>
> Attaching to threaded process on glibc 2.33: libthread_db fails to initialize with "generic error"
>
> Patch v2 at:
> https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2021-May/178485.html
>
> Are there other issues or last minute features we'd like to include
> before we branch and/or release?
For issues, I have a couple that I'd like to get fixed for AArch64 MTE
before GDB 11. I'll file those in bugzilla and will set the fields
accordingly.
In terms of features, I'd really like to get AArch64 MTE core file
support (dumping registers and memory tags) in before GDB 11. I don't
expect it to be a big change, but I'm still polishing the series so I
can submit it.
Given this step needs coordination with the kernel, there might be
delays here and there. Do you think that will be acceptable?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: start of the GDB 11 release cycle
2021-05-10 3:52 ` Luis Machado
@ 2021-05-10 22:11 ` Joel Brobecker
2021-05-11 11:05 ` Luis Machado
2021-05-24 19:42 ` Joel Brobecker
1 sibling, 1 reply; 24+ messages in thread
From: Joel Brobecker @ 2021-05-10 22:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Luis Machado; +Cc: gdb-patches
Hi Luis,
> For issues, I have a couple that I'd like to get fixed for AArch64 MTE
> before GDB 11. I'll file those in bugzilla and will set the fields
> accordingly.
>
> In terms of features, I'd really like to get AArch64 MTE core file support
> (dumping registers and memory tags) in before GDB 11. I don't expect it to
> be a big change, but I'm still polishing the series so I can submit it.
>
> Given this step needs coordination with the kernel, there might be delays
> here and there. Do you think that will be acceptable?
Do you have a rough idea of how long this would take?
--
Joel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: start of the GDB 11 release cycle
2021-05-10 22:11 ` Joel Brobecker
@ 2021-05-11 11:05 ` Luis Machado
2021-05-11 17:00 ` Joel Brobecker
0 siblings, 1 reply; 24+ messages in thread
From: Luis Machado @ 2021-05-11 11:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joel Brobecker; +Cc: gdb-patches
On 5/10/21 7:11 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> Hi Luis,
>
>> For issues, I have a couple that I'd like to get fixed for AArch64 MTE
>> before GDB 11. I'll file those in bugzilla and will set the fields
>> accordingly.
>>
>> In terms of features, I'd really like to get AArch64 MTE core file support
>> (dumping registers and memory tags) in before GDB 11. I don't expect it to
>> be a big change, but I'm still polishing the series so I can submit it.
>>
>> Given this step needs coordination with the kernel, there might be delays
>> here and there. Do you think that will be acceptable?
>
> Do you have a rough idea of how long this would take?
>
I have an implementation I can send within a couple weeks. From the
kernel's side, we just need to agree on the core file format.
So my guesstimate is 3 to 4 weeks.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: start of the GDB 11 release cycle
2021-05-11 11:05 ` Luis Machado
@ 2021-05-11 17:00 ` Joel Brobecker
2021-05-12 18:15 ` Luis Machado
0 siblings, 1 reply; 24+ messages in thread
From: Joel Brobecker @ 2021-05-11 17:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Luis Machado; +Cc: gdb-patches
> I have an implementation I can send within a couple weeks. From the kernel's
> side, we just need to agree on the core file format.
>
> So my guesstimate is 3 to 4 weeks.
Alright. Let's see how it goes. I'm thinking that if this is still
ongoing by the time we are otherwise ready to create the branch,
we can go ahead with the branch, and then backport your changes
afterwards. Normally, the risk should be fairly low and limited
to just this target.
--
Joel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: start of the GDB 11 release cycle
2021-05-11 17:00 ` Joel Brobecker
@ 2021-05-12 18:15 ` Luis Machado
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Luis Machado @ 2021-05-12 18:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joel Brobecker; +Cc: gdb-patches
Joel,
On 5/11/21 2:00 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote:
>> I have an implementation I can send within a couple weeks. From the kernel's
>> side, we just need to agree on the core file format.
>>
>> So my guesstimate is 3 to 4 weeks.
>
> Alright. Let's see how it goes. I'm thinking that if this is still
> ongoing by the time we are otherwise ready to create the branch,
> we can go ahead with the branch, and then backport your changes
> afterwards. Normally, the risk should be fairly low and limited
> to just this target.
Sounds reasonable. I expect the impact will be small indeed. I'll try to
expedite this.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: start of the GDB 11 release cycle
2021-05-10 3:52 ` Luis Machado
2021-05-10 22:11 ` Joel Brobecker
@ 2021-05-24 19:42 ` Joel Brobecker
2021-05-24 20:27 ` Luis Machado
1 sibling, 1 reply; 24+ messages in thread
From: Joel Brobecker @ 2021-05-24 19:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Luis Machado; +Cc: gdb-patches
Hello Luis,
> For issues, I have a couple that I'd like to get fixed for AArch64 MTE
> before GDB 11. I'll file those in bugzilla and will set the fields
> accordingly.
Would you mind creating the bugzilla entries? If you have patches
pending, would you mind also including them in the comment section
of new entries. It'll make it easier for me to keep track of this one
and not forget.
Other than that, how is that activity going? Do you feel like you are
making the progress you were hoping for?
Thank you!
--
Joel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: start of the GDB 11 release cycle
2021-05-24 19:42 ` Joel Brobecker
@ 2021-05-24 20:27 ` Luis Machado
2021-05-24 21:02 ` Joel Brobecker
0 siblings, 1 reply; 24+ messages in thread
From: Luis Machado @ 2021-05-24 20:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joel Brobecker; +Cc: gdb-patches
Hi Joel,
On 5/24/21 4:42 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> Hello Luis,
>
>> For issues, I have a couple that I'd like to get fixed for AArch64 MTE
>> before GDB 11. I'll file those in bugzilla and will set the fields
>> accordingly.
>
> Would you mind creating the bugzilla entries? If you have patches
> pending, would you mind also including them in the comment section
> of new entries. It'll make it easier for me to keep track of this one
> and not forget.
Sorry, I dropped the ball on this. Since all of the required patches are
on the list being reviewed (I sent them last week), I did not create
tickets for those.
I think I should still do that to make your life easier though. I'm
thinking a single ticket tracking the 4 or 5 patches related to it.
Would that work?
>
> Other than that, how is that activity going? Do you feel like you are
> making the progress you were hoping for?
Yes. The patches are not too big and I got some helpful positive
reviews. I'm expecting to be able to push a final version in a week or so.
>
> Thank you!
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: start of the GDB 11 release cycle
2021-05-24 20:27 ` Luis Machado
@ 2021-05-24 21:02 ` Joel Brobecker
2021-05-25 10:46 ` Luis Machado
0 siblings, 1 reply; 24+ messages in thread
From: Joel Brobecker @ 2021-05-24 21:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Luis Machado; +Cc: gdb-patches
Hi Luis,
> > > For issues, I have a couple that I'd like to get fixed for AArch64 MTE
> > > before GDB 11. I'll file those in bugzilla and will set the fields
> > > accordingly.
> >
> > Would you mind creating the bugzilla entries? If you have patches
> > pending, would you mind also including them in the comment section
> > of new entries. It'll make it easier for me to keep track of this one
> > and not forget.
>
> Sorry, I dropped the ball on this. Since all of the required patches are on
> the list being reviewed (I sent them last week), I did not create tickets
> for those.
>
> I think I should still do that to make your life easier though. I'm thinking
> a single ticket tracking the 4 or 5 patches related to it. Would that work?
Thanks Luis. This would work. That being said, if you prefer giving
me URLs of the patch series, as long as the subject doesn't change
from one version to the next, I don't mind following that instead.
I only mentioned it because you originally proposed to do it that way.
I would do what's simplest for you.
> > Other than that, how is that activity going? Do you feel like you are
> > making the progress you were hoping for?
>
> Yes. The patches are not too big and I got some helpful positive reviews.
> I'm expecting to be able to push a final version in a week or so.
Nice, well done ;-).
--
Joel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: start of the GDB 11 release cycle
2021-05-24 21:02 ` Joel Brobecker
@ 2021-05-25 10:46 ` Luis Machado
2021-05-26 22:04 ` Joel Brobecker
0 siblings, 1 reply; 24+ messages in thread
From: Luis Machado @ 2021-05-25 10:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joel Brobecker; +Cc: gdb-patches
Joel,
On 5/24/21 6:02 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> Hi Luis,
>
>>>> For issues, I have a couple that I'd like to get fixed for AArch64 MTE
>>>> before GDB 11. I'll file those in bugzilla and will set the fields
>>>> accordingly.
>>>
>>> Would you mind creating the bugzilla entries? If you have patches
>>> pending, would you mind also including them in the comment section
>>> of new entries. It'll make it easier for me to keep track of this one
>>> and not forget.
>>
>> Sorry, I dropped the ball on this. Since all of the required patches are on
>> the list being reviewed (I sent them last week), I did not create tickets
>> for those.
>>
>> I think I should still do that to make your life easier though. I'm thinking
>> a single ticket tracking the 4 or 5 patches related to it. Would that work?
>
> Thanks Luis. This would work. That being said, if you prefer giving
> me URLs of the patch series, as long as the subject doesn't change
> from one version to the next, I don't mind following that instead.
> I only mentioned it because you originally proposed to do it that way.
> I would do what's simplest for you.
Here it is:
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27909
>
>>> Other than that, how is that activity going? Do you feel like you are
>>> making the progress you were hoping for?
>>
>> Yes. The patches are not too big and I got some helpful positive reviews.
>> I'm expecting to be able to push a final version in a week or so.
>
> Nice, well done ;-).
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: start of the GDB 11 release cycle
2021-05-10 0:04 start of the GDB 11 release cycle Joel Brobecker
2021-05-10 3:20 ` Mike Frysinger
2021-05-10 3:52 ` Luis Machado
@ 2021-05-10 5:52 ` Bernd Edlinger
2021-05-10 15:10 ` Simon Marchi
2021-05-10 22:12 ` Joel Brobecker
2021-05-11 12:45 ` Rainer Orth
3 siblings, 2 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Bernd Edlinger @ 2021-05-10 5:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joel Brobecker, gdb-patches
Hi Joel,
On 5/10/21 2:04 AM, Joel Brobecker wrote:
>
> Are there other issues or last minute features we'd like to include
> before we branch and/or release?
>
> Thank you!
>
I think my patch to improve the debug experience of optimized code
is stable since january and might also be a good candidiate:
[PATCH 0/4] Improve debugging of optimized code
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2021-January/175617.html
Thanks
Bernd.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: start of the GDB 11 release cycle
2021-05-10 5:52 ` Bernd Edlinger
@ 2021-05-10 15:10 ` Simon Marchi
2021-05-10 16:07 ` Andrew Burgess
2021-05-10 22:12 ` Joel Brobecker
1 sibling, 1 reply; 24+ messages in thread
From: Simon Marchi @ 2021-05-10 15:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bernd Edlinger, Joel Brobecker, gdb-patches
On 2021-05-10 1:52 a.m., Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> I think my patch to improve the debug experience of optimized code
> is stable since january and might also be a good candidiate:
>
> [PATCH 0/4] Improve debugging of optimized code
> https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2021-January/175617.html
I agree, however it's a matter of determining who is most qualified to
review this, it's not easy. I don't think I'm the best person for
this.
Simon
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: start of the GDB 11 release cycle
2021-05-10 15:10 ` Simon Marchi
@ 2021-05-10 16:07 ` Andrew Burgess
2021-05-10 16:57 ` Simon Marchi
0 siblings, 1 reply; 24+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Burgess @ 2021-05-10 16:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Simon Marchi; +Cc: Bernd Edlinger, Joel Brobecker, gdb-patches
* Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org> [2021-05-10 11:10:32 -0400]:
> On 2021-05-10 1:52 a.m., Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> > I think my patch to improve the debug experience of optimized code
> > is stable since january and might also be a good candidiate:
> >
> > [PATCH 0/4] Improve debugging of optimized code
> > https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2021-January/175617.html
>
> I agree, however it's a matter of determining who is most qualified to
> review this, it's not easy. I don't think I'm the best person for
> this.
I don't claim to be the best, but I have an interest in reviewing this
patch. I'll try to take a look as soon as I can, but if anyone else
wanted to look too that would be great.
Thanks,
Andrew
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: start of the GDB 11 release cycle
2021-05-10 16:07 ` Andrew Burgess
@ 2021-05-10 16:57 ` Simon Marchi
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Simon Marchi @ 2021-05-10 16:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Burgess; +Cc: Bernd Edlinger, Joel Brobecker, gdb-patches
On 2021-05-10 12:07 p.m., Andrew Burgess wrote:
> I don't claim to be the best, but I have an interest in reviewing this
> patch. I'll try to take a look as soon as I can, but if anyone else
> wanted to look too that would be great.
Then I'll do it for you: I claim you are the best ;)
Simon
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: start of the GDB 11 release cycle
2021-05-10 5:52 ` Bernd Edlinger
2021-05-10 15:10 ` Simon Marchi
@ 2021-05-10 22:12 ` Joel Brobecker
1 sibling, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Joel Brobecker @ 2021-05-10 22:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bernd Edlinger; +Cc: gdb-patches
> > Are there other issues or last minute features we'd like to include
> > before we branch and/or release?
> >
> > Thank you!
> >
>
> I think my patch to improve the debug experience of optimized code
> is stable since january and might also be a good candidiate:
>
> [PATCH 0/4] Improve debugging of optimized code
> https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2021-January/175617.html
Understood. Thanks for the heads up and corresponding link.
We'll wait for that one.
--
Joel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: start of the GDB 11 release cycle
2021-05-10 0:04 start of the GDB 11 release cycle Joel Brobecker
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2021-05-10 5:52 ` Bernd Edlinger
@ 2021-05-11 12:45 ` Rainer Orth
2021-05-11 16:57 ` Joel Brobecker
3 siblings, 1 reply; 24+ messages in thread
From: Rainer Orth @ 2021-05-11 12:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joel Brobecker; +Cc: gdb-patches
Hi Joel,
> It's been about 6.5 months since we made the first GDB 10 release (10.1).
> So I propose we start the process of creating the GDB 11 release now.
[...]
> Are there other issues or last minute features we'd like to include
> before we branch and/or release?
I've just tried a sparcv9-sun-solaris2.11 build of gdb master and found
that there are hundreds of testsuite regressions, unlike
amd64-pc-solaris2.11 which is effectively unchanged. It turned out that
this is a known issue already reported (only for binutils previously) in
PR binutils/27666.
The easiest (and safest) course of action is to revert the
bfd/config.bfd part of Alan's original patch, I believe.
Rainer
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: start of the GDB 11 release cycle
2021-05-11 12:45 ` Rainer Orth
@ 2021-05-11 16:57 ` Joel Brobecker
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Joel Brobecker @ 2021-05-11 16:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rainer Orth; +Cc: gdb-patches
> > It's been about 6.5 months since we made the first GDB 10 release (10.1).
> > So I propose we start the process of creating the GDB 11 release now.
> [...]
> > Are there other issues or last minute features we'd like to include
> > before we branch and/or release?
>
> I've just tried a sparcv9-sun-solaris2.11 build of gdb master and found
> that there are hundreds of testsuite regressions, unlike
> amd64-pc-solaris2.11 which is effectively unchanged. It turned out that
> this is a known issue already reported (only for binutils previously) in
> PR binutils/27666.
>
> The easiest (and safest) course of action is to revert the
> bfd/config.bfd part of Alan's original patch, I believe.
Thanks for the heads up, Rainer.
I'll follow that one as well. Worse case scenario, if there is
a delay in the actual fix, we can go with the revert you mentioned
right after we've created the branch, so we have a backup plan.
--
Joel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-05-29 15:58 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-05-10 0:04 start of the GDB 11 release cycle Joel Brobecker
2021-05-10 3:20 ` Mike Frysinger
2021-05-10 22:10 ` Joel Brobecker
2021-05-24 19:40 ` Joel Brobecker
2021-05-25 2:01 ` Mike Frysinger
2021-05-26 22:03 ` Joel Brobecker
2021-05-29 15:58 ` Mike Frysinger
2021-05-10 3:52 ` Luis Machado
2021-05-10 22:11 ` Joel Brobecker
2021-05-11 11:05 ` Luis Machado
2021-05-11 17:00 ` Joel Brobecker
2021-05-12 18:15 ` Luis Machado
2021-05-24 19:42 ` Joel Brobecker
2021-05-24 20:27 ` Luis Machado
2021-05-24 21:02 ` Joel Brobecker
2021-05-25 10:46 ` Luis Machado
2021-05-26 22:04 ` Joel Brobecker
2021-05-10 5:52 ` Bernd Edlinger
2021-05-10 15:10 ` Simon Marchi
2021-05-10 16:07 ` Andrew Burgess
2021-05-10 16:57 ` Simon Marchi
2021-05-10 22:12 ` Joel Brobecker
2021-05-11 12:45 ` Rainer Orth
2021-05-11 16:57 ` Joel Brobecker
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).