From: Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Cc: kettenis@chello.nl, mec.gnu@mindspring.com,
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Improve i386 prologue analyzer
Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 13:59:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4116AEA1.7060900@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7137-Sun08Aug2004223001+0300-eliz@gnu.org>
>>> Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 10:07:58 -0400
>>> From: Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>
>>>
>>> So by releasing 6.2._2_ in 2-3 weeks with this patch, and 6.2.1 today we
>>> get a win-win. The MIPS fix isn't held up, and the i386 fix gets 2-3
>>> more weeks to mature :-)
>
>
> You know, I really don't understand what is going on here. First, I'm
> told that GDB 6.2 cannot wait and must be released with the MIPS
> broken, and now GDB 6.2.1 cannot wait for a week or two because MIPS
> is broken? How does that make any sense?
Here's how things are panning out:
week 0.0: @6.2:
For current mainstream systems, our best releaes ever!
Late breaking discovery that MIPS is broken, time to resolution unknown
(guess 2 weeks) but workaround in hand.
week 1.5: 6.2.1:
Critical MIPS problem fixed.
Fix for long-standing i386 bug known (needs 2 weeks testing)
week 4.0: 6.2.2:
Long standing bug on old i386 systems fixed.
Does this seem reasonable.
Andrew
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-08-09 13:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-08-01 21:58 Mark Kettenis
2004-08-02 4:04 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-08-02 21:19 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-08-03 3:55 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-08-06 19:33 ` Mark Kettenis
2004-08-06 20:29 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-08-07 15:37 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-08-07 16:20 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-08-07 17:11 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-08-07 17:38 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-08-07 18:30 ` Joel Brobecker
2004-08-07 18:52 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-08-07 22:41 ` Michael Chastain
2004-08-08 3:57 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-08-08 10:24 ` Michael Chastain
2004-08-08 11:08 ` Mark Kettenis
2004-08-08 14:08 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-08-08 15:04 ` Mark Kettenis
2004-08-08 19:32 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-08-09 13:59 ` Andrew Cagney [this message]
2004-08-09 15:07 ` Mark Kettenis
2004-08-09 16:46 ` Michael Chastain
2004-08-09 19:09 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-08-11 0:02 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-08-11 3:53 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-08-11 17:13 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-08-11 17:55 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-08-12 12:43 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-08-12 19:00 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-08-12 21:41 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-08-08 19:29 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-08-08 19:28 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-08-07 15:31 ` Eli Zaretskii
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-08-18 9:42 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
2003-08-18 17:17 ` Mark Kettenis
2003-08-17 23:34 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
2003-08-17 23:16 Mark Kettenis
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=4116AEA1.7060900@gnu.org \
--to=cagney@gnu.org \
--cc=eliz@gnu.org \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=kettenis@chello.nl \
--cc=mec.gnu@mindspring.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