From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3701 invoked by alias); 20 Aug 2014 11:38:02 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 3678 invoked by uid 89); 20 Aug 2014 11:38:02 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: relay1.mentorg.com Received: from relay1.mentorg.com (HELO relay1.mentorg.com) (192.94.38.131) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 20 Aug 2014 11:38:01 +0000 Received: from svr-orw-exc-10.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.98.58]) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1XK4DF-0005ug-Dj from Yao_Qi@mentor.com ; Wed, 20 Aug 2014 04:37:57 -0700 Received: from SVR-ORW-FEM-06.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.97.120]) by SVR-ORW-EXC-10.mgc.mentorg.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 20 Aug 2014 04:37:57 -0700 Received: from qiyao.dyndns.org (147.34.91.1) by SVR-ORW-FEM-06.mgc.mentorg.com (147.34.97.120) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.2.247.3; Wed, 20 Aug 2014 04:37:56 -0700 Message-ID: <53F487AC.7070606@codesourcery.com> Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2014 11:38:00 -0000 From: Yao Qi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pedro Alves , Jan Kratochvil CC: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: --with-babeltrace generates many FAILs References: <20140816204614.GA7000@host2.jankratochvil.net> <53F3457E.5030205@codesourcery.com> <20140819140755.GA30208@host2.jankratochvil.net> <53F41DE5.1010406@codesourcery.com> <53F46D48.2060200@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <53F46D48.2060200@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-08/txt/msg00393.txt.bz2 On 08/20/2014 05:41 PM, Pedro Alves wrote: > As there's been fixed babeltrace versions for a while, I'd go with > simply dropping the workaround, and have integrators build newer > GDB with newer babeltrace. I suppose we have a testcase in our > testsuite that fails if we remove the workaround and GDB is built with > broken babeltrace? That should let the integrator know that it's > building again a broken lib. Yes, we have such test case, such as actions.exp, at least. Without the workaround, GDB with libbabeltrace 1.1.0 will fail in actions.exp. However, is it a good idea that let test failure signal a wrong version lib is used? I am not sure. It is the configure's job to check whether the library is wrong or broken. > > IOW, why do we still need to support 1.1.0? No special reason, 1.1.0 was just used when I did the CTF work in GDB, and was used on my laptop since then. IIRC, 1.1.0 was released in 2013 March, so it isn't very old and it might be used somewhere. Shouldn't we be conservative in this case? In general, GDB and GDBserver uses a set of libraries, what are the criteria of 1. stop supporting a version of a library, such as libbabeltrace 1.1.0 2. stop supporting or using a library, such as the UST stuff in GDBserver, -- Yao (齐尧)