Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Cc: mishra.nitish.88@gmail.com, Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>,
	Antoine Tremblay <antoine.tremblay@ericsson.com>
Subject: GDB 8.0 release/branching update (10 more days to branching)
Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2017 17:59:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170304175903.qwbqoqm35raz4dov@adacore.com> (raw)

Hello everyone,

We are now about 10 days away from our tentative date for branching.
First of all, a big thank you for all of you who fixed some of those
PRs that were marked for 8.0!

As of now, we have 3 PRs currently open:

* gdb/21187  Static linking of libstdc++ and libgcc with GDB leads to
             broken exception handling on AIX platform

        I consider this one blocking for release (OK for branching):
        New regression, no easy workaround.

        The person who opened the PR actually sent a patch to
        bugzilla, but I asked him (in Cc: here) to send the patch here,
        so it can be reviewed, and possibly integrated. It's a
        workaround, but it introduces a feature which could also
        be useful in other contexts.

        It should be sufficiently small and obvious that copyright
        assignment not be an issue.

* gdb/21216     regression: TUI by: Eliminate make_cleanup_ui_file_delete
                / make ui_file a class hierarchy

        We should be changing the subject to "missing carriage return
        in TUI mode" or something like that. That's what it is about.

        Clearly a regression, clearly blocking. But the hope is that
        it be relatively simple to fix (from the look of it).
        Already assigned.

* gdb/21169     GDBServer on ARM can crash the inferior while single stepping

        Considered blocking, but only if it doesn't delay the release
        unreasonably.

        Antoine is this PR's champion.

So, all in all, at the moment, I don't think we have anything blocking
for creating the release. But if you know of some other issues, please
let us know.

At this point, we're getting sufficiently close to starting the release
process that I would like people to let me know when they mark
a PR for 8.0 (target milestone field), as this is the signal that
we can't release until it is fixed. And when you do, please explain
what your reasons are.

Thank you!
-- 
Joel


             reply	other threads:[~2017-03-04 17:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-03-04 17:59 Joel Brobecker [this message]
2017-03-04 22:16 ` Yao Qi
2017-03-07  0:26   ` Joel Brobecker
2017-03-07 15:06 ` Pedro Alves
2017-03-09 18:52 ` Andreas Arnez

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20170304175903.qwbqoqm35raz4dov@adacore.com \
    --to=brobecker@adacore.com \
    --cc=antoine.tremblay@ericsson.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    --cc=mishra.nitish.88@gmail.com \
    --cc=palves@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox