* 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).