From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18032 invoked by alias); 3 May 2010 03:55:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 18024 invoked by uid 22791); 3 May 2010 03:55:38 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (38.113.113.100) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 03 May 2010 03:55:35 +0000 Received: (qmail 26027 invoked from network); 3 May 2010 03:55:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO macbook-2.local) (stan@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 3 May 2010 03:55:32 -0000 Message-ID: <4BDE492E.1020004@codesourcery.com> Date: Mon, 03 May 2010 03:55:00 -0000 From: Stan Shebs User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Macintosh/20100228) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eli Zaretskii CC: Stan Shebs , pedro@codesourcery.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: gdb/PROBLEMS ? References: <201005021726.19409.pedro@codesourcery.com> <4BDE28F9.5040005@codesourcery.com> <83pr1dvfzi.fsf@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <83pr1dvfzi.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-05/txt/msg00030.txt.bz2 Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Date: Sun, 02 May 2010 18:38:01 -0700 >> From: Stan Shebs >> CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org >> >> Pedro Alves wrote: >> >>> I looked over the described problems in gdb/PROBLEMS, and, it looks >>> to me that all of them fall in one of two categories: either >>> they've been fixed already, or aren't worth mentioning here. >>> Anyone wants to double check, or believes otherwise? I'll >>> be happy to adjust the patch. >>> >>> >> I'd say to just toss the file entirely, and remove mentions of it in the >> documentation. It's really just a relic of pre-web days; I'd be >> astonished if there were any users who would think to look at it instead >> of going to our website. >> > > Are you saying that no one ever works off-line these days? > > Not at all, in fact I bet I do it more than most people. But we haven't been maintaining an up-to-date self-contained synopsis of open bugs, and as far as I know nobody is complaining that they were working offline the other day, and couldn't wait until getting back online to find out what bugs were open. If a bug were so serious that we needed to be sure that everyone knew about it, even if they were using GDB while backpacking through upper Amazonia, then I would think we'd want it at the top of gdb/NEWS, with extra markup to ensure that it would be blinking red in most file readers. :-) Another way to look at it is that both NEWS and PROBLEMS are chapters of the release note, and it's generally simpler for users if all release note info is in a single place. Stan