From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11521 invoked by alias); 17 Oct 2014 14:03:00 -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 11471 invoked by uid 89); 17 Oct 2014 14:03:00 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 17 Oct 2014 14:02:58 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s9HE2sHf026887 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 17 Oct 2014 10:02:55 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s9HE2r3O001282; Fri, 17 Oct 2014 10:02:53 -0400 Message-ID: <5441218C.60103@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2014 14:03:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Joel Brobecker , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: GDB 7.8.1 release planned Mon Oct 27... References: <20141017135538.GI25846@adacore.com> In-Reply-To: <20141017135538.GI25846@adacore.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2014-10/txt/msg00480.txt.bz2 On 10/17/2014 02:55 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote: > Hello, > > Just a quick message to remind everyone that the target date for > the GDB 7.8.1 minor release was Oct 27th, which is 10 days away. Thanks. > We still have 1 outstanding problem marked as blocking, and one > marked as a maybe. If there is anything else that should be on > our watch list, please let us know! I haven't at that one yet, but I will soon. I'd like to have PR17408 fixed too. (switch_back_to_stepped_thread: Assertion `!schedlock_applies (1)' failed). I've had reports of that one triggering through other channels too. I'll add it to the wiki. Thanks, Pedro Alves