From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1235 invoked by alias); 16 Sep 2004 19:25:46 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 1222 invoked from network); 16 Sep 2004 19:25:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 16 Sep 2004 19:25:45 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.34 #1 (Debian)) id 1C81t3-0000T1-D7; Thu, 16 Sep 2004 15:25:45 -0400 Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 19:25:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Jim Blandy Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: getting the Dwarf 2 inter-CU reference patches reviewed Message-ID: <20040916192545.GA1061@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Jim Blandy , gdb@sources.redhat.com References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i X-SW-Source: 2004-09/txt/msg00144.txt.bz2 On Thu, Sep 16, 2004 at 02:21:34PM -0500, Jim Blandy wrote: > > It would be nice if GDB 6.3 included your inter-compilation-unit > reference support. > > Perhaps we could reverse the review process a bit. I could work on > your branch, and submit patches to you for review. Then, when I've > gotten it looking the way I'd like to see it on the trunk, we can move > it in. > > Does that seem reasonable? It's really my fault that this didn't happen. I dropped the ball. If you'd like to do it that way, we can - but you might want to wait a bit; I finished merging HEAD to the branch this morning and I'm testing an updated partial symbols patch right this moment. I need to stop promising to have things done by specific dates. I think I promised Andrew this would be done two days ago. -- Daniel Jacobowitz