From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11461 invoked by alias); 16 Aug 2012 22:36:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 11368 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Aug 2012 22:36:41 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_NO 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; Thu, 16 Aug 2012 22:36:28 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59E991C6D5D; Thu, 16 Aug 2012 18:36:27 -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 rOgx+vT4NaBf; Thu, 16 Aug 2012 18:36:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26AB71C6D5C; Thu, 16 Aug 2012 18:36:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 3C46514561A; Thu, 16 Aug 2012 15:36:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2012 22:36:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Tom Tromey Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: gdb-7.5 branch ready for first release? Message-ID: <20120816223625.GB2798@adacore.com> References: <20120803134518.GZ27483@adacore.com> <87mx2bna7c.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20120816200704.GA2798@adacore.com> <87mx1umv8m.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87mx1umv8m.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) 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: 2012-08/txt/msg00466.txt.bz2 > Joel> Looks a little tricky, and MarkK expressed some reservations on > Joel> the approach. I suggest we keep this one out of 7.5? > > FWIW I already put it on the branch. Ha! That makes it simpler :). > However, this patch doesn't affect that design one way or another. > Instead it fixes a concrete bug in the code. It does so in a way that, > I believe, is safe and relatively clear. Works for me. I'll try making the release tomorrow. Thanks, Tom. -- Joel