From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5239 invoked by alias); 4 Apr 2008 16:01:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 5231 invoked by uid 22791); 4 Apr 2008 16:01:04 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from igw1.br.ibm.com (HELO igw1.br.ibm.com) (32.104.18.24) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 Apr 2008 16:00:39 +0000 Received: from mailhub1.br.ibm.com (mailhub1 [9.18.232.109]) by igw1.br.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB24C32C3BB for ; Fri, 4 Apr 2008 12:38:43 -0300 (BRST) Received: from d24av01.br.ibm.com (d24av01.br.ibm.com [9.18.232.46]) by mailhub1.br.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.7) with ESMTP id m34G0Zjm3854452 for ; Fri, 4 Apr 2008 13:00:36 -0300 Received: from d24av01.br.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d24av01.br.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id m34G0YUN025532 for ; Fri, 4 Apr 2008 13:00:35 -0300 Received: from [9.8.6.97] ([9.8.6.97]) by d24av01.br.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m34G0Xws025467 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 4 Apr 2008 13:00:33 -0300 Subject: Re: [rfa, gdbserver] Fix breakage due to XML rework From: Luis Machado Reply-To: luisgpm@linux.vnet.ibm.com To: Ulrich Weigand Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz , gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: <200803271313.m2RDD2kM020534@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> References: <200803271313.m2RDD2kM020534@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2008 17:32:00 -0000 Message-Id: <1207324826.19907.3.camel@gargoyle> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.12.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-04/txt/msg00103.txt.bz2 Hi Uli, On Thu, 2008-03-27 at 14:13 +0100, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 02:53:26AM +0100, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > > > OK to apply? > > > > Yes, this all looks OK. Thanks. Is this needed for 6.8 too? > > Checked in, thanks. The XML rework was introduced after the > branch point, so these fixes are not needed for 6.8. This regressed two testcases for PowerPC (not sure if any other archs are affected), ext-run.exp and server-run.exp. This might have something to do with this message that shows up during the execution: "Protocol error: qXfer:features:read (target-features) conflicting enabled responses." Reverting the patch fixes the problem. Regards, -- Luis Machado IBM Linux Technology Center