Re: GDB 6.1 "frozen"

["Eli Zaretskii" <eliz@gnu.org>]

> From: David Carlton <carlton@kealia.com>
> Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 09:58:13 -0800
> 
> Michael's reason for want to list
> all regressions, if I understand him properly, is so that users can
> check to see if anything has changed from 6.0 to 6.1 that would cause
> them not to want to upgrade; I have a very hard time imagining a
> scenario where any of the C++ issues that are listed would block an
> upgrade.

I tend to agree.  I understand that the C++ support in 6.1 got much
better, and that the number of resolved problem outnumbers the new
ones.

Michael, could you please comment?

> So the only question, in my mind, is what issues are important enough
> that users should be warned about them so we don't get lots of bug
> reports; the breakpoints in constructors issue seems to me to qualify
> (I get asked about that often enough at work) but the other issues
> don't.

Yes, I think this is the principle that should govern our decisions
what to include in PROBLEMS.

> Having said that, it is the case that I occasionally get asked at work
> about why people are getting errors when casting, whereas I never get
> asked about problems related to gdb/931, gdb/1512, or gdb/1516.  So I
> could see a case for keeping the mention of gdb/1518 in there as well.

To me, the text you suggested sounds important enough to be added.