From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18289 invoked by alias); 23 Dec 2019 07:43:54 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 18280 invoked by uid 89); 23 Dec 2019 07:43:53 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-5.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=Looks, backport, respond, undo X-HELO: rock.gnat.com Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Mon, 23 Dec 2019 07:43:52 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39EC1116507; Mon, 23 Dec 2019 02:43:51 -0500 (EST) 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 rziFRcSKINH1; Mon, 23 Dec 2019 02:43:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C485A1164C5; Mon, 23 Dec 2019 02:43:50 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 81861899C3; Mon, 23 Dec 2019 11:43:46 +0400 (+04) Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2019 07:43:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: Christian Biesinger , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: GDB 9.0.90 available for testing Message-ID: <20191223074346.GC11677@adacore.com> References: <20191211214745.E1CF0838D4@joel.gnat.com> <83tv604239.fsf@gnu.org> <835zic2wer.fsf@gnu.org> <83h81w14z1.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <83h81w14z1.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-SW-Source: 2019-12/txt/msg00977.txt.bz2 > > > I've now reported the problem to Readline developers. Should I go > > > ahead and patch our local copy, or should I wait for the Readline > > > developers to respond? > > > > Looks like Chet acknowledged the patch: > > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-readline/2019-12/msg00003.html > > Yes. > > > Given the unusual way the readline git repository is managed, probably > > best to patch it locally for now? (not like I have any authority > > here...) > > Joel, could you please advise? Of course! :-) Just for clarity and completeness, I'll mention that this is more about our handling of readline inside GDB than release management. But I've had to deal with readline issues before, so I think I know the process, which is basically: - Patch locally, and submit the patch to readline; - Keep track of the patch submission on the readline end; when a patch is applied, if different from the one accepted upstream, then undo our local patch, and apply the one from upstream. This ensures the one applied upstream doesn't introduce some issues we haven't seen during review. Another version of the process is when the fix was already applied upstream. In that case, no need to submit anything, since it's already fixed. We just backport the fix from upstream into GDB's version of readline. -- Joel