* gdb-7.5 status (branch?)
@ 2012-06-27 14:32 Joel Brobecker
2012-07-02 12:14 ` Jan Kratochvil
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Joel Brobecker @ 2012-06-27 14:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb
Hello everyone,
Time for a quick status update for the GDB 7.5 branch again.
I see that the list of items in our TODO list has grown :-(.
Sounds to me like the following could be checked in reasonably soon:
# [Jan] [mingw] Fix "%lld" compilation error
# [Jan] auto-load safe-path: Permit shell wildcards
My thoughts & questions on some of the tickets:
# [dje] Noticeable performance degradation with large C++ apps.
There is a work-around of compiling with -fno-debug-type-sections,
so optional? (if yes, probably a note in the release announcement)
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14002
# [dje] Performance issue with .gdb_index and large numbers of shared libs.
Status?
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14125
# [dje] Fix inconsistency in blockvector addrmap vs non-addrmap handling
At first, it sounded like the initial patch was fine.
But then some more developments occurred. What can we do?
Is it sufficient to apply the initial patch, and then
fix other problem. Or is that first patch insufficient
or incorrect?
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2012-06/msg00109.html
# [Jan] -iex and -ix: Execute them _after_ gdbinits
The proposal was surprisingingly controversial, but my
understanding is that it is 3 GMs in favor versus 1 against.
As much as I hate these situations, I think Jan should go
ahead. It's not just a question of numbers: Jan designed
an wrote the feature for his own needs, so I think he should
have a stronger voice about what the feature should do.
And since most GMs who expressed an opinion were in favor
of the adjustment...
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2012-06/msg00549.html
# I also have a set of changes for ia64-hpux, which fix a crash
when debugging programs that use fork. But that's not critical.
Hopefully I'll be able to commit in time.
Based on this, should we branch, or not? Given the status on some
of the issues, I think I'll wait a few more days to get those ones
out of the way. I propose we re-evaluate again on Monday.
--
Joel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: gdb-7.5 status (branch?)
2012-06-27 14:32 gdb-7.5 status (branch?) Joel Brobecker
@ 2012-07-02 12:14 ` Jan Kratochvil
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Jan Kratochvil @ 2012-07-02 12:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joel Brobecker; +Cc: gdb
On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 16:31:38 +0200, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> Sounds to me like the following could be checked in reasonably soon:
>
> # [Jan] [mingw] Fix "%lld" compilation error
> # [Jan] auto-load safe-path: Permit shell wildcards
[...]
> # [Jan] -iex and -ix: Execute them _after_ gdbinits
Checked in.
> Based on this, should we branch, or not?
Not yet today IMO: http://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/GDB_7.5_Release
Thanks,
Jan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2012-07-02 12:14 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2012-06-27 14:32 gdb-7.5 status (branch?) Joel Brobecker
2012-07-02 12:14 ` Jan Kratochvil
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).