From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12897 invoked by alias); 7 Aug 2004 17:38:18 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 12886 invoked from network); 7 Aug 2004 17:38:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 7 Aug 2004 17:38:17 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i77HcHe3024605 for ; Sat, 7 Aug 2004 13:38:17 -0400 Received: from localhost.redhat.com (porkchop.devel.redhat.com [172.16.58.2]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i77HcGa13374; Sat, 7 Aug 2004 13:38:16 -0400 Received: from gnu.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 004E32B9D; Sat, 7 Aug 2004 13:38:00 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <41151378.5020102@gnu.org> Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 17:38:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-GB; rv:1.4.1) Gecko/20040801 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eli Zaretskii , kettenis@chello.nl Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] Improve i386 prologue analyzer References: <200408012158.i71LwpRw033840@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> <3405-Mon02Aug2004070159+0300-eliz@gnu.org> <410EAFBB.5080102@gnu.org> <2914-Tue03Aug2004065313+0300-eliz@gnu.org> <200408061933.i76JX3HJ008032@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> <4113EA3B.3000900@gnu.org> <2914-Sat07Aug2004183455+0300-eliz@gnu.org> <41150161.3000306@gnu.org> <9787-Sat07Aug2004200852+0300-eliz@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <9787-Sat07Aug2004200852+0300-eliz@gnu.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-08/txt/msg00207.txt.bz2 Mark, Eli is pressing hard for, I guess you, to do an accelerated backport. What do you think? Andrew >>Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 12:20:49 -0400 >>> From: Andrew Cagney >>> >>> Mark wrote: >>> >> >>>> > I'd really like this to get some exposure in HEAD before backporting >>>> > it, but otherwise I do agree. > > > Sure, but IMHO the change doesn't need too much testing more than it > already got. Don't the developers use CVS HEAD most of the time? > Don't they use it mostly on IA32 (GNU/Linux or otherwise) systems? If > so, the patch is mostly tested. > > >>> Remember, at present MIPS is dead in the water. > > > With backtraces misbehaving as they do now, I consider the x86 broken > almost as badly as the MIPS. As I told before, because of that bug, I > mistrusted GDB 6.1 to such a degree that I started to use GDB 5.x. > > >>> For how long should we delay pushing out a fix for that? > > > A week or two won't do much harm, IMHO. But I doubt that we need even > that much. >