From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18098 invoked by alias); 8 Aug 2003 15:51:04 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 18085 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2003 15:51:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO concert.shout.net) (204.253.184.25) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 8 Aug 2003 15:51:03 -0000 Received: from duracef.shout.net (duracef.shout.net [204.253.184.12]) by concert.shout.net (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h78Fp0S4016069; Fri, 8 Aug 2003 10:51:00 -0500 Received: from duracef.shout.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by duracef.shout.net (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h78Fp0HK014937; Fri, 8 Aug 2003 10:51:00 -0500 Received: (from mec@localhost) by duracef.shout.net (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h78FoxCR014936; Fri, 8 Aug 2003 11:50:59 -0400 Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2003 15:51:00 -0000 From: Michael Elizabeth Chastain Message-Id: <200308081550.h78FoxCR014936@duracef.shout.net> To: ac131313@redhat.com, cgd@broadcom.com Subject: Re: [rfa:threads] Report when using libthread_db Cc: ezannoni@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com X-SW-Source: 2003-08/txt/msg00127.txt.bz2 > Michael, Mark, ok for mainline? Too risky for 6.0? Proofread, but not tested. I would say, throw it on mainline and see if it bounces. But keep it out of 6.0. It doesn't fix a regression or a serious bug. Michael C