From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29229 invoked by alias); 12 Aug 2004 12:43:16 -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 29210 invoked from network); 12 Aug 2004 12:43:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 12 Aug 2004 12:43:12 -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 i7CCh1e3028669 for ; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 08:43:06 -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 i7CCh1a07952; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 08:43:01 -0400 Received: from gnu.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62B5C2B9D; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 08:42:56 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <411B65D0.1040900@gnu.org> Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 12:43:00 -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 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> <41155A83.nail9VC11PTRT@mindspring.com> <7704-Sun08Aug2004065437+0300-eliz@gnu.org> <4115FF44.nail59F11C8I0@mindspring.com> <200408081108.i78B8Cpk009362@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> <411633BE.2010809@gnu.org> <7137-Sun08Aug2004223001+0300-eliz@gnu.org> <4116AEA1.7060900@gnu.org> <2914-Mon09Aug2004220629+0300-eliz@gnu.org> <411961FC.4010007@gnu.org> <6654-Wed11Aug2004065005+0300-eliz@gnu.org> <411A53C6.3020906@gnu.org> <8011-Wed11Aug2004205209+0300-eliz@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <8011-Wed11Aug2004205209+0300-eliz@gnu.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-08/txt/msg00450.txt.bz2 >>> Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 13:13:42 -0400 >>> From: Andrew Cagney >> >>>> > >>>> > We are talking about two weeks, not about months or something. Why is >>>> > it worthwhile to go through the pains of another version just so the >>>> > MIPS patch could be released a week or two earlier than if it were to >>>> > be part of the same version as the i386 prologue patch? >> >>> >>> Sorry, I don't follow. I would have thought that a little bit of pain >>> (on our part) would be worth the satisfaction of seeing us deliver a >>> better working GDB sooner. > > > It's not only pain on our part (which I don't think we should dismiss > so lightly, btw, but that's just me). Please, please, articulate the `pain on our part' that we're apparently all suffering. I'm the release manager, if anyone is is going to experience pain, it's going to be me. > It's also the pain of our users > who will need to install two versions within 4 weeks. This update is for _MIPS_ users only. The next update is for _i386_ users only. > And I still don't understand what is the rush to release the MIPS > patch without waiting for another week or two and then releasing the > i386 patch as well. If I were a MIPS user (hmm, I'm even the maintainer), I'd be pretty cheesed off that a fix to get `break main; run' working was being held back due the inistance that it be bundled with an unrelated i386 fix. Andrew