* GDB 6.3 branch 2004-10-16-ish
@ 2004-10-06 17:41 Andrew Cagney
2004-10-06 17:48 ` Joel Brobecker
2004-10-06 17:56 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Cagney @ 2004-10-06 17:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb
The two big lumps appear to have been swallowed - ada and ICU. There's
still stuff floating around for instance:
- end-of-life deprecated_registers
- end-of-life xm file (that looks likely to slip)
I might get bored and mark up gdb over the weekend the comming weekend.
But others, such as the bfd stuff needed to de-hack vsyscall are going
to have to slip out.
However, I don't see anything really blocking the next release.
Andrew
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: GDB 6.3 branch 2004-10-16-ish
2004-10-06 17:41 GDB 6.3 branch 2004-10-16-ish Andrew Cagney
@ 2004-10-06 17:48 ` Joel Brobecker
2004-10-06 17:56 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Joel Brobecker @ 2004-10-06 17:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Cagney; +Cc: gdb
> The two big lumps appear to have been swallowed - ada and ICU. There's
> still stuff floating around for instance:
>
> - end-of-life deprecated_registers
> - end-of-life xm file (that looks likely to slip)
>
> I might get bored and mark up gdb over the weekend the comming weekend.
> But others, such as the bfd stuff needed to de-hack vsyscall are going
> to have to slip out.
>
> However, I don't see anything really blocking the next release.
Yes, I think we should start the release process now, I don't think
the deprecated_registers issue is a big deal. I will make a point
of building and testing GDB on all the Unix machines we have at AdaCore
and see where we stand.
--
Joel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: GDB 6.3 branch 2004-10-16-ish
2004-10-06 17:41 GDB 6.3 branch 2004-10-16-ish Andrew Cagney
2004-10-06 17:48 ` Joel Brobecker
@ 2004-10-06 17:56 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-10-06 18:58 ` Andrew Cagney
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Jacobowitz @ 2004-10-06 17:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Cagney; +Cc: gdb
On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 01:38:22PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> The two big lumps appear to have been swallowed - ada and ICU. There's
> still stuff floating around for instance:
>
> - end-of-life deprecated_registers
> - end-of-life xm file (that looks likely to slip)
>
> I might get bored and mark up gdb over the weekend the comming weekend.
> But others, such as the bfd stuff needed to de-hack vsyscall are going
> to have to slip out.
Ignoring the de-hacking, how about actually connecting it?
I'm still waiting for the two corresponding failures in corefile.exp to
go away.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: GDB 6.3 branch 2004-10-16-ish
2004-10-06 17:56 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
@ 2004-10-06 18:58 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-10-06 19:10 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Cagney @ 2004-10-06 18:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Daniel Jacobowitz; +Cc: gdb
> On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 01:38:22PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
>
>>> The two big lumps appear to have been swallowed - ada and ICU. There's
>>> still stuff floating around for instance:
>>>
>>> - end-of-life deprecated_registers
>>> - end-of-life xm file (that looks likely to slip)
>>>
>>> I might get bored and mark up gdb over the weekend the comming weekend.
>>> But others, such as the bfd stuff needed to de-hack vsyscall are going
>>> to have to slip out.
>
>
> Ignoring the de-hacking, how about actually connecting it?
Which system? It's already connected on i386 GNU/Linux right?
> I'm still waiting for the two corresponding failures in corefile.exp to
> go away.
The de-hack is to fix the failures on corefile and attach :-/
Andrew
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: GDB 6.3 branch 2004-10-16-ish
2004-10-06 18:58 ` Andrew Cagney
@ 2004-10-06 19:10 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-10-25 9:43 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Jacobowitz @ 2004-10-06 19:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Cagney; +Cc: gdb
On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 02:57:35PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> >On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 01:38:22PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> >
> >>>The two big lumps appear to have been swallowed - ada and ICU. There's
> >>>still stuff floating around for instance:
> >>>
> >>>- end-of-life deprecated_registers
> >>>- end-of-life xm file (that looks likely to slip)
> >>>
> >>>I might get bored and mark up gdb over the weekend the comming weekend.
> >>> But others, such as the bfd stuff needed to de-hack vsyscall are going
> >>>to have to slip out.
> >
> >
> >Ignoring the de-hacking, how about actually connecting it?
>
> Which system? It's already connected on i386 GNU/Linux right?
No. The thread "Re: [obish?sym;rfa:doc] Wire up vsyscall" was never
resolved; neither your patch nor mine was committed and both are
needed.
> >I'm still waiting for the two corresponding failures in corefile.exp to
> >go away.
>
> The de-hack is to fix the failures on corefile and attach :-/
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: GDB 6.3 branch 2004-10-16-ish
2004-10-06 19:10 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
@ 2004-10-25 9:43 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Jacobowitz @ 2004-10-25 9:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Cagney, gdb
On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 03:02:08PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 02:57:35PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> > >On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 01:38:22PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> > >
> > >>>The two big lumps appear to have been swallowed - ada and ICU. There's
> > >>>still stuff floating around for instance:
> > >>>
> > >>>- end-of-life deprecated_registers
> > >>>- end-of-life xm file (that looks likely to slip)
> > >>>
> > >>>I might get bored and mark up gdb over the weekend the comming weekend.
> > >>> But others, such as the bfd stuff needed to de-hack vsyscall are going
> > >>>to have to slip out.
> > >
> > >
> > >Ignoring the de-hacking, how about actually connecting it?
> >
> > Which system? It's already connected on i386 GNU/Linux right?
>
> No. The thread "Re: [obish?sym;rfa:doc] Wire up vsyscall" was never
> resolved; neither your patch nor mine was committed and both are
> needed.
>
> > >I'm still waiting for the two corresponding failures in corefile.exp to
> > >go away.
> >
> > The de-hack is to fix the failures on corefile and attach :-/
It turns out that the fixes in corefile.exp had nothing to do with
vsyscall, but a different local problem on my system. That's because,
even without vsyscall wired up, we can stumble through the test well
enough to match the regexps:
#0 0xffffe410 in ?? ()
#1 0xbfffe768 in ?? ()
#2 0x00000006 in ?? ()
#3 0x000022fc in ?? ()
#4 0x40081e23 in raise () from /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6
#5 0x4008371c in abort () from /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6
#6 0x0804869c in func2 () at /big/fsf/projects/vsyscall/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/coremaker.c:127
#7 0x080486a7 in func1 () at /big/fsf/projects/vsyscall/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/coremaker.c:133
#8 0x080486c3 in main () at /big/fsf/projects/vsyscall/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/coremaker.c:139
(gdb) PASS: gdb.base/corefile.exp: backtrace in corefile.exp
In any case, in the process of finding that out I updated the vsysall
patches. I'll post them.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-10-24 18:43 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2004-10-06 17:41 GDB 6.3 branch 2004-10-16-ish Andrew Cagney
2004-10-06 17:48 ` Joel Brobecker
2004-10-06 17:56 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-10-06 18:58 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-10-06 19:10 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-10-25 9:43 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
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).