Outstanding?

Outstanding?

[Andrew Cagney]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 199 bytes --]

FYI,

My pending / sep mail boxes contain the attached.  If you see something 
that has been resolved, let me know.

Anything I see still outstanding, I'm going to convert into a bug report.

Andrew

[-- Attachment #2: outstanding --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 7755 bytes --]

	gdb-5.2-dwarfread_patch
 [PATCH] Add support for scanf, gets in h8300 simulator
5.3 branch?  Was: insight rename patch
Adapt refcard.tex for pdftex
DWARF-2, static data members
External debug symbols
GDB PR categories
Getting the i386 watchpoints into the taget vector?
HP catchpoint code
Issue an internal warning on first deprecated function call
JIT Debugging Documentation
MIPS simulator initializes LSI pmon vector table with code
Merging OC gdb with official gdb
New binutils directory src/include/cpu/ for .cpu and .opc files?
PATCH: Fix restarting breakpoint (gdb 5.2 removes the conditional breakpoints)
PATCH: Revert change of 2001-10-23
Patch ping
Patch that provides true single step for multi-threaded /proc based 
Patch to improve var-evaluate-expression doc
Proposed gdb patch
RDI code busy-waiting on running target?
RFA (threads testsuite): More thread tests
RFA: >, >>, and "tee" operators
RFA: Convert to add_setshow_cmd
RFA: Correct field names for class methods
RFA: Make cli-out follow gdb_stdout
RFA: abstract out thread compilation code
RFA: don't read coff line number unless we have symbols too
RFA: don't use minsym name when searching block
RFA: next gettextization step
RFA: respect `nosignals' setting in annota1.exp
RFA: test C++ casts
RFC: CLI clenup and edit command
RFC: Two small remote protocol extensions
RFC: ``detach remote''
RFC: dummy.[hc] and ``struct dummy''
Race condition in sol-thread.c
Remote Protocol: Z? packet proposal
Remote protocol extension - detaching
Remote protocol: Z-packets
Review of DW_TAG_module and DWARF multiple comp unit header support 
TARGET_REGION_OK_FOR_HW_WATCHPOINT in target vector
THUMB_FP vs. ARM_FP
THUMB_FP vs. ARM_FP 
TYPE_VPTR_BASETYPE and TYPE_DOMAIN_TYPE
WIP: Register doco
[David Carlton <carlton@math.Stanford.EDU>] Re: [RFA] dwarf2read.c:
[David Carlton <carlton@math.Stanford.EDU>] Re: [RFA] dwarf2read.c: set TYPE_DOMAIN_TYPE correctly for methods
[David Carlton <carlton@math.Stanford.EDU>] [RFA] DWARF-2, static data members
[David Carlton <carlton@math.Stanford.EDU>] [RFA] dwarf2read.c: set TYPE_DOMAIN_TYPE correctly for methods
[Fwd: Adapt refcard.tex for pdftex]
[Fwd: RFA: abstract out thread compilation code]
[Fwd: [RFA] Patch to correct problem with 'detach' on Tru64]
[Fwd: superfluous line in hpread.c]
[Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>] RFA: abstract out thread compilation code
[Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>] RFA: don't read coff line number unless we have symbols too
[Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>] RFA: respect `nosignals' setting in annota1.exp
[Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>] Re: RFA: test GDB's ability to
[PATCH RFA/RFC] Don't use lwp_from_thread() in thread_db_wait()
[PATCH RFC/RFA] Use ui_out cleanups in breakpoint.c
[PATCH RFC] Character set support
[PATCH RFC] Use ui_out cleanups in cli-setshow.c
[PATCH/RFA] Add new readline.exp test for operate-and-get-next
[PATCH/RFA] arm-netbsdelf cross-debugging fixes
[PATCH] Add support for scanf, gets in h8300 simulator
[PATCH] Minor reformatting in infrun.c
[PATCH] Multi-arch i386 instruction printing
[PATCH] Small fixes for expect to allow compilation with native IRIX6 tools
[PATCH] i386nbsd_pc_in_sigtramp robustness
[PATCH] z8k fixes
[PATCH]: Provide TUI fast key action with specific readline keymap
[PING] Unreviewed testsuite patches
[RFA/MI testsuite] Add pthreads tests
[RFA/TESTSUITE]: readline tests
[RFA/controversial] move bp by line number past the prologue
[RFA/doco] Document NAME_OF_MALLOC
[RFA/resubmit] shlib-call.exp: stepping out...
[RFA] (varobj) Fix gdb/701
[RFA] 2nd send: Solve the watchpoint failures on second run.
[RFA] Add declaration in i386-tdep.h (for interix)
[RFA] Change to parse error reporting
[RFA] DWARF multiple comp unit header support - Revision - Part
[RFA] DWARF multiple comp unit header support - Revision - Part 1
[RFA] DWARF-2, static data members
[RFA] Don't coerce arrays if they're vectors.
[RFA] Fix watchpoints when stepping over a breakpoint
[RFA] GDB/622 - clear current breakpoint in commands causes trouble
[RFA] GDB/624 - tbreak commands not executed when breakpoint hit
[RFA] Minor changes to proc-api.c for Interix
[RFA] New bitflags type and eflags on i386/x86-64
[RFA] Patch for supportinf DW_TAG_module / FORTRAN modules
[RFA] Patch to correct problem with 'detach' on Tru64
[RFA] add selected-frame-level-changed events
[RFA] annota1.exp: Don't require complete pathname in info break test
[RFA] convert blocks to dictionaries, phase 1, main part
[RFA] convert blocks to dictionaries, phase 1, mdebugread.c
[RFA] delete BLOCK_SHOULD_SORT
[RFA] deleting breakpoints inside of 'commands'
[RFA] dwarf2read.c: set TYPE_DOMAIN_TYPE correctly for methods
[RFA] enable software single step on alpha-osf
[RFA] gdb.base/shr1.c: Avoid preprocessor conflict on IRIX
[RFA] generic_dummy glitch in arm-tdep.c
[RFA] generic_dummy glitch in arm-tdep.c 
[RFA] lin-lwp.c change to avoid obscure hanging
[RFA] sighandler backtrace on x86-64
[RFA]: Make gdb_do_one_event public and fix uiout setting for TUI
[RFC] "clear" command behavior - ending-run.exp 
[RFC] -symbol-info-symbol and -symbol-list-functions
[RFC] Final(?) GDB/MI -symbol-*
[RFC] GDB/MI -symbol-* functions
[RFC] Take 2: Adding new files for Interix port
[RFC] Updated mi-cmd-symbol.c patch
[RFC] breakpoints and function prologues...
[RFC] environment.c
[RFC] gdb/674: GDB/MI No way to know the current selected thread
[RFC]: Document TUI breakpoints and SingleKey mode
[maint] sim and common
[patch, rfc] configure option for default value of solib-search-path
[patch/5.3, rfa:testsuite] Fix $fp and $pc in display command
[patch/hold] Convert MIPS to generic dummy frames
[patch/rfa:i386] Switch to generic unwind get saved register
[patch/rfc/rfa*] Only compare against dummy frame tos when saved
[patch/rfc] Don't complain about unknown OSABI
[patch/rfc] Don't complain about unknown OSABI 
[patch/rfc] Rationalize Instruction Set Architecture targets
[patch/wip] Save/restore cooked registers
[patch/wip] Save/restore cooked registers 
[patch] Fix to processing end of function stab in dbxread.c
[patch] New Target - Fujitsu FRV
[patch] New Target for sim - Fujitsu FRV
[patch] New sim Target - Fujitsu FRV: Testsuite
[patch] unwind support for gdb/ia64
[rfa/c++-testsuite]: printing out methods
[rfa/c++testsuite] (was Re: patch for PR gdb/574)
[rfa/c++testsuite] (was patch for PR gdb/574)
[rfa/i386] Consolidate i386 targets
[rfa/testsuite] more tests in gdb.c++/m-static
[rfa:doco] document frame_align()
[rfa:doco] document frame_align() 
[rfa:gnu] __FUNCTION__ cleanup
[rfa] Add -m; Was: ARM sim patch: increase default target memory
[rfa] Fix breakpoint error messages
[rfa] Symbol hashing (for the last time?)
[rfa] hardware breakpoints -- remote targets
[rfc/rfa:doco] Use @sc{gdb}?
[rfc] 16 bit real-mode for the i386
[rfc] A type for the i386 mxcsr
[rfc] Add per frame frame_saved_pc()
[rfc] MSR and System regs for RedBoot target
[rfc] Query Red Boot's i386 CPU id
add disk device to PowerPC sim
adding namespace support to GDB
contribution to cygwin gdb
dwarf2_build_psymtabs should check that .debug_line exists
fix for gdb/635
forwarded message from WARREN, Stuart (Gillingham)
gdb 5.2 removes the conditional breakpoints
gdb vs readline, 1line patch
gdb-5.2-dwarfread_patch
how long should symbols remain LOC_UNRESOLVED?
i386 register groups?
list of GNU indent versions in gdb_indent.sh
maint set|show internal-error|internal-warning quit|corefile 
maint set|show internal-error|internal-warning quit|corefile yes|no|auto
naming command arguments
once again about GDB protocol
ptype bug
ptype bug RESEND
references to uninitialized static const members
sim/common/ and sim/igen/ contributed to the FSF
superfluous line in hpread.c
watchpoint count wrong, think-o

Re: Outstanding?

[Daniel Jacobowitz]

Quite a list, let's see how I can help.

On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 11:16:19PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> RFA: abstract out thread compilation code

Pretty sure that one's resolved.

> RFA: don't read coff line number unless we have symbols too
> RFA: don't use minsym name when searching block
> RFA: test C++ casts
> RFC: CLI clenup and edit command

Definitely not sure, but I thought these were also?

> RFC: ``detach remote''

Yeah, I owe an MI test case for this.  I'll do it today if I can.

> Remote protocol extension - detaching

This was part of the above, right?  If so, I think it's covered.

> Review of DW_TAG_module and DWARF multiple comp unit header support 

... please.

> THUMB_FP vs. ARM_FP
> THUMB_FP vs. ARM_FP 

Duplicate.  Don't know its status, though.

> TYPE_VPTR_BASETYPE and TYPE_DOMAIN_TYPE

I think this is done.

> [David Carlton <carlton@math.Stanford.EDU>] Re: [RFA] dwarf2read.c:
> [David Carlton <carlton@math.Stanford.EDU>] Re: [RFA] dwarf2read.c: set TYPE_DOMAIN_TYPE correctly for methods
> [David Carlton <carlton@math.Stanford.EDU>] [RFA] DWARF-2, static data members
> [David Carlton <carlton@math.Stanford.EDU>] [RFA] dwarf2read.c: set TYPE_DOMAIN_TYPE correctly for methods
> [Fwd: RFA: abstract out thread compilation code]
> [Fwd: superfluous line in hpread.c]
> [Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>] RFA: abstract out thread compilation code
> [Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>] RFA: don't read coff line number unless we have symbols too
> [Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>] Re: RFA: test GDB's ability to

I _think_ these all went in.

> [PATCH RFC] Character set support

Done.

> [PATCH/RFA] Add new readline.exp test for operate-and-get-next

Done.

> [RFA/MI testsuite] Add pthreads tests

Done now I think.

> [RFA/controversial] move bp by line number past the prologue

Definitely still pending.

> [RFA] 2nd send: Solve the watchpoint failures on second run.

I think this went in 5.2.1 and trunk.

> [RFA] dwarf2read.c: set TYPE_DOMAIN_TYPE correctly for methods

Done as above...

> [patch/5.3, rfa:testsuite] Fix $fp and $pc in display command

Didn't you commit that?

> [patch] Fix to processing end of function stab in dbxread.c

I think this patch should go in...

> [rfa/testsuite] more tests in gdb.c++/m-static

Think this did.

> [rfa] Symbol hashing (for the last time?)

Wow, this is old.  Yes, this went in.

> adding namespace support to GDB

Well, the issue is still outstanding, but I don't know what message
this is.  I would know if our mailing lists were searchable by
something besides ht://Dig...

> gdb vs readline, 1line patch

Went in.

> references to uninitialized static const members

Went in, I think.

> superfluous line in hpread.c

Went in.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer

Re: Outstanding?

[Andrew Cagney]

Thanks! (Yes, I should have filtered it slightly before sending it out).

Re: Outstanding?

[David Carlton]

On Thu, 26 Sep 2002 23:16:19 -0400, Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com> said:

> My pending / sep mail boxes contain the attached.  If you see
> something that has been resolved, let me know.

I think I've gone through and spotted all the ones that are my fault
(though, given their number, I probably missed some).  If I'm grouping
messages together, they all refer to the same thing, so if I say "This
has been taken care of" it refers to all the messages right above it.
Basically, there's only one issue of mine that's open right now.

> DWARF-2, static data members
> [David Carlton <carlton@math.Stanford.EDU>] [RFA] DWARF-2, static
> data members
> [RFA] DWARF-2, static data members

This is still outstanding.  It's the only thing here that is
outstanding; I think the patch is pretty obvious and I would prefer to
get it in before 5.3, if possible, but it's not a critical situation.
(Basicaly, GCC and GDB both make the same mistake, so everything works
fine now.)

> [David Carlton <carlton@math.Stanford.EDU>] Re: [RFA] dwarf2read.c:

I'm not sure what this is, so I wouldn't worry about it: it's
doubtless the same as one of the other messages cited.

> [David Carlton <carlton@math.Stanford.EDU>] Re: [RFA] dwarf2read.c: set TYPE_DOMAIN_TYPE correctly for methods
> [David Carlton <carlton@math.Stanford.EDU>] [RFA] dwarf2read.c: set TYPE_DOMAIN_TYPE correctly for methods
> [RFA] dwarf2read.c: set TYPE_DOMAIN_TYPE correctly for methods

This has been taken care of.

> [Fwd: superfluous line in hpread.c]
> superfluous line in hpread.c

This has been taken care of.

> dwarf2_build_psymtabs should check that .debug_line exists

This has been taken care of.

> [RFA] convert blocks to dictionaries, phase 1, main part
> [RFA] convert blocks to dictionaries, phase 1, mdebugread.c
> [RFC] environment.c
> adding namespace support to GDB

This is being pulled back and reworked.

> [RFA] delete BLOCK_SHOULD_SORT

Jim Blandy has responded to it, and right now it's on hold while
issues he raised get worked out.  (It's not a bug, so there's
certainly no reason to worry about it before 5.3 gets released.)

> [rfa/c++-testsuite]: printing out methods
> [rfa/c++testsuite] (was Re: patch for PR gdb/574)
> [rfa/c++testsuite] (was patch for PR gdb/574)
> [rfa/testsuite] more tests in gdb.c++/m-static

These have been taken care of.

> fix for gdb/635
> references to uninitialized static const members

This has been taken care of.

David Carlton
carlton@math.stanford.edu

Re: Outstanding?

[Andrew Cagney]

Thanks,
I'm now down to ~300 ....
Andrew

Re: Outstanding?

[Jim Blandy]

The following patches have been committed:

> RFA: abstract out thread compilation code
> [Fwd: RFA: abstract out thread compilation code]
> [Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>] RFA: abstract out thread compilation code
> RFA: don't read coff line number unless we have symbols too
> [Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>] RFA: don't read coff line number unless we have symbols too
> RFA: don't use minsym name when searching block
> [Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>] Re: RFA: test GDB's ability to
> [PATCH RFC] Character set support
> dwarf2_build_psymtabs should check that .debug_line exists

The following are still awaiting approval:

> RFA: respect `nosignals' setting in annota1.exp
> [Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>] RFA: respect `nosignals' setting in annota1.exp
> RFA: test C++ casts
> [RFA] dwarf2read.c: set TYPE_DOMAIN_TYPE correctly for methods

For the below, we're waiting for papers for the fellow who modified
the patch:

> Review of DW_TAG_module and DWARF multiple comp unit header support 
> [RFA] DWARF multiple comp unit header support - Revision - Part
> [RFA] DWARF multiple comp unit header support - Revision - Part 1

This one has been rejected --- well, put off until we know what effect
it has on mdebug.

> [RFA] delete BLOCK_SHOULD_SORT

These are being handled on a branch; they're not RFA's:

> [RFA] convert blocks to dictionaries, phase 1, main part
> [RFA] convert blocks to dictionaries, phase 1, mdebugread.c
> [RFC] environment.c

This is awaiting further discussion; it would be good to have it in
the bug database.

> [patch] Fix to processing end of function stab in dbxread.c

Re: Outstanding?

[David Carlton]

On 27 Sep 2002 17:56:13 -0500, Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com> said:

> The following are still awaiting approval:

>> [RFA] dwarf2read.c: set TYPE_DOMAIN_TYPE correctly for methods

No, that one's been approved.  The one that I'm waiting for approval
on is:

[RFA] DWARF-2, static data members

David Carlton
carlton@math.stanford.edu

Re: Outstanding?

[Michael Snyder]

> Patch that provides true single step for multi-threaded /proc based

The guy who submitted the above has never responded to email since then.
It's missing a changelog entry.  Should I just write one and check it in?


> RFA (threads testsuite): More thread tests

This has been checked in.

> RFA: abstract out thread compilation code

So has this.

> Race condition in sol-thread.c

This one was rejected.


> TARGET_REGION_OK_FOR_HW_WATCHPOINT in target vector

> THUMB_FP vs. ARM_FP

Checked in.

> [Fwd: [RFA] Patch to correct problem with 'detach' on Tru64]

Checked in.


> [PATCH] Minor reformatting in infrun.c

Checked in.

> [RFA/controversial] move bp by line number past the prologue

Didn't achieve consensus, as I recall...

> [RFA] 2nd send: Solve the watchpoint failures on second run.

Rats.  This one escaped.  Jim or I should look at it.

> [RFA] Change to parse error reporting

This one was committed, and so noted on the list.

> [RFA] Don't coerce arrays if they're vectors.

Outstanding.

> [RFA] Fix watchpoints when stepping over a breakpoint

The last msg in this thread was yours.

> [RFA] GDB/622 - clear current breakpoint in commands causes trouble
> [RFA] GDB/624 - tbreak commands not executed when breakpoint hit

Committed.

> [RFA] Patch to correct problem with 'detach' on Tru64

Committed.

> [RFA] deleting breakpoints inside of 'commands'

Handled on a different thread, closed.

> [RFA] enable software single step on alpha-osf

Committed.

> [RFA] generic_dummy glitch in arm-tdep.c

Committed.

Re: Outstanding?

[Andrew Cagney]

Just FYI, I got my outstanding down to zero.
Everything is now a bug report.  See:
http://sources.redhat.com/gdb/bugs/

Andrew

Re: Outstanding?

[Daniel Jacobowitz]

On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 07:20:39PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> Just FYI, I got my outstanding down to zero.
> Everything is now a bug report.  See:
> http://sources.redhat.com/gdb/bugs/

Really?  Where are they all?

You filed fifty or so PRs, I think.  Looks like 725 through 769.  Your
outstanding list was oodles longer even ignoring duplicates.  For
instance, choosing one at random, the controversial breakpoint at the
beginning of the prologue patch; there's no bug report for that.

Just don't want you to think they're all accounted for and start losing
them...

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer

Re: Outstanding?

[Andrew Cagney]

> On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 07:20:39PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> 
>> Just FYI, I got my outstanding down to zero.
>> Everything is now a bug report.  See:
>> http://sources.redhat.com/gdb/bugs/
> 
> 
> Really?  Where are they all?

Many of the threads were not for patches.  Rather for issues, questions 
and other problems.  None of those lead to a bug report.

> You filed fifty or so PRs, I think.  Looks like 725 through 769.  Your
> outstanding list was oodles longer even ignoring duplicates.  For
> instance, choosing one at random, the controversial breakpoint at the
> beginning of the prologue patch; there's no bug report for that.

My understanding of that patch was ``no CLI change''.  See MichaelS's 
comment.  Someone can change the MI if they so feel.


> Just don't want you to think they're all accounted for and start losing
> them...

?

Andrew