From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12620 invoked by alias); 16 Nov 2011 21:23:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 12611 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Nov 2011 21:23:18 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from elasmtp-galgo.atl.sa.earthlink.net (HELO elasmtp-galgo.atl.sa.earthlink.net) (209.86.89.61) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 21:23:01 +0000 Received: from [70.170.59.51] (helo=macbook2.local) by elasmtp-galgo.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1RQmwe-0004V7-HF for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 16:23:00 -0500 Message-ID: <4EC429A4.4070201@earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 21:23:00 -0000 From: Stan Shebs User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20110929 Thunderbird/7.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: RFA: implement ambiguous linespec proposal References: <20111028221459.GA28467@host1.jankratochvil.net> <20111104074543.GA13839@host1.jankratochvil.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ELNK-Trace: ae6f8838ff913eba0cc1426638a40ef67e972de0d01da9406665a20eadbfeb629ce9a04ea797eb57350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2011-11/txt/msg00453.txt.bz2 On 11/15/11 8:30 AM, Tom Tromey wrote: >>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Tromey writes: > Tom> I plan to commit this sometime this week, barring objections or > Tom> comments; after the doc patch (forthcoming) is approved. > > I'm having second thoughts about this. Today it seems slightly crazy to > check in such a huge patch just before a release. Any other thoughts on > this? > > Tom > One of the advantages of hacking on GDB vs GCC is that GDB degrades more gracefully; it's rare for a GDB patch to completely break debugging, while an innocent-looking GCC patch can bring the whole house of cards down. Plus, we don't have any dependencies pushing us to release on a particular date, right? So I tend to think this would be OK for 7.4. Stan stan@codesourcery.com