From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10099 invoked by alias); 24 Oct 2007 21:00:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 10073 invoked by uid 22791); 24 Oct 2007 21:00:33 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 24 Oct 2007 21:00:26 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2968A98343; Wed, 24 Oct 2007 21:00:25 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0F6A981F2; Wed, 24 Oct 2007 21:00:24 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1IknKy-0005zP-4G; Wed, 24 Oct 2007 17:00:24 -0400 Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 21:01:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Joel Brobecker Cc: Luis Machado , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [patch] Backtrace prints wrong argument value Message-ID: <20071024210024.GT10943@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Joel Brobecker , Luis Machado , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <1190037624.4651.24.camel@localhost> <20070917140416.GA15635@caradoc.them.org> <1190049306.4651.42.camel@localhost> <20070917171821.GA2107@caradoc.them.org> <1192997096.5584.2.camel@localhost> <20071021232837.GD6180@adacore.com> <20071022010550.GA12211@caradoc.them.org> <20071022033114.GB764@adacore.com> <20071024204654.GP10943@caradoc.them.org> <20071024205833.GP764@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20071024205833.GP764@adacore.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15 (2007-04-09) 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: 2007-10/txt/msg00630.txt.bz2 On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 01:58:33PM -0700, Joel Brobecker wrote: > > With Pedro's help, two are now fixed. Only build/2339 remains. But > > that's with SunPro and I don't think it's a blocker - so we are > > probably good to go now. > > OK, I'd like to also include the piece of NEWS for hppa64-hpux > (which I'm about to submit). Shall we target Friday or early > next week? That sounds like a good idea. I should really try to get a patch for hppa-linux checked in. It doesn't build with current kernel headers, and may not have for quite a while. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery