From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9744 invoked by alias); 22 Aug 2003 15:53:45 -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 9714 invoked from network); 22 Aug 2003 15:53:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO concert.shout.net) (204.253.184.25) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 22 Aug 2003 15:53:43 -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 h7MFrQWn025763; Fri, 22 Aug 2003 10:53:26 -0500 Received: from duracef.shout.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by duracef.shout.net (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h7MFrQHK013328; Fri, 22 Aug 2003 10:53:26 -0500 Received: (from mec@localhost) by duracef.shout.net (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h7MFrP2p013327; Fri, 22 Aug 2003 11:53:25 -0400 Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 15:53:00 -0000 From: Michael Elizabeth Chastain Message-Id: <200308221553.h7MFrP2p013327@duracef.shout.net> To: ac131313@redhat.com, drow@mvista.com Subject: Re: [commit] Last major piece of fork tracing - vfork/exec Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com X-SW-Source: 2003-08/txt/msg00391.txt.bz2 I hate to cause trouble here. We're all on edge with the release coming up (and this is also end-of-quarter for the red hat people). But I have to speak up. The release is already being held up for the gdb.c++ -> gdb.cp renaming. The one-week comment period for that change ends this afternoon. Then I can commit this change to gdb HEAD. Then it needs a shakedown period in gdb HEAD. Then I can commit the change to gdb gdb_6_0-branch, and it will need a shakedown period there as well. Andrew, I'm frankly amazed that you decided this feature was release critical, but that's okay. My role is to get it into the branch expeditiously. Also I'm not saying "as long as we have one dependency it's okay to have two". Dependencies are expensive, mmmkay. I'm just saying that gdb 6.0 already has this gdb.cp dependency, so it's not all Daniel's fault that the release is slipping. Michael C