From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28762 invoked by alias); 28 Sep 2009 18:07:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 28694 invoked by uid 22791); 28 Sep 2009 18:07:38 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 28 Sep 2009 18:07:28 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 797CF2BAB2B; Mon, 28 Sep 2009 14:07:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id bltEWehghnA3; Mon, 28 Sep 2009 14:07:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 905662BAB52; Mon, 28 Sep 2009 14:07:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 44A1FF5942; Mon, 28 Sep 2009 08:58:53 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 18:07:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Michael Snyder Cc: Hui Zhu , gdb-patches ml , Marc Khouzam Subject: Re: Record segfault Message-ID: <20090928155853.GA9003@adacore.com> References: <4ABE96C8.6070702@vmware.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4ABE96C8.6070702@vmware.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) 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: 2009-09/txt/msg00877.txt.bz2 Michael, > This seems fine to me. Please check it into the main branch, > but don't add it to the release branch unless Joel says it's OK. It seems like a worthwhile patch to have, since it fixes a SEGV (right?). Are you confident about the patch? It seems relatively straightforward. My only comment is that it eliminates a query when the user types a record stop - is that desirable? I guess it is: What are the chances of someone typing "record stop" and not wanting to stop the recording session? In other words: I am ok with the patch being applied to the branch. If you are, can you give Hui the go-ahead? -- Joel