From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 49952 invoked by alias); 9 Feb 2016 12:37:28 -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 49923 invoked by uid 89); 9 Feb 2016 12:37:26 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=urls, URLs, responsive, grateful 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; Tue, 09 Feb 2016 12:37:25 +0000 Received: from int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.26]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 65DEE8E222; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 12:37:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u19CbLph029842; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 07:37:22 -0500 Message-ID: <56B9DD81.5030606@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2016 12:37:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Joel Brobecker , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, sergiodj@redhat.com, Yao Qi , keiths@redhat.com Subject: Re: RFC: branching for GDB 7.11 soon? (possibly Wed) References: <20160201030638.GG4008@adacore.com> <20160207081230.GA20874@adacore.com> <20160209115617.GG15342@adacore.com> In-Reply-To: <20160209115617.GG15342@adacore.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2016-02/txt/msg00225.txt.bz2 On 02/09/2016 11:56 AM, Joel Brobecker wrote: > Hello everyone, > > Once again, I am very grateful to everyone who is so responsive > in trying to help us create that branch! > > Quick status update again, based on the latest feedback: > >>> PR19506 Regression with gdb.Breakpoint("*") >> >> This lead to a wider fix: >> [PATCH V2 0/4] Add support for "legacy" linespecs >> https://www.sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-02/msg00024.html > > I took a look over the weekend, and it seems fairly unintrusive. > I propose we push it now. Otherwise, I think it's safe to create > the branch before pushing this patch, and backport afterwards. I took a quick look and it looks fine to me too. > >> PR 19548 - breakpoint re-set inserts breakpoints when it shouldn't >> Pedro sent a patch: >> https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-02/msg00014.html > > Time to push? Done. > >> There is also a crash (regression): >> >> PR 19546 - gdb crash calling exec in the inferior >> Initial guestimate from Pedro: >> | Looks like a regression of the explicit locations work. >> Still in Pedro's court, or could Keith help? > > Looks like the fix is fairly straightforward. > >> Sergio - would you be able to give us a rough description of how >> good the results are in the buildbots? Anything we should be >> aware of for this release? (Thanks!) > > In terms of status: > > - C++ build detected a build regression: Fixed, AFAIK. Yes, fixed. > > - Some regressions in Ada due to a testsuite patch > Worse case scenario, we could revert on the branch, if a simple > fix is not available (I am confident, though). > I can't see from the URLs provided what the error looks like, > but it should only affect in-tree build & testing? > > So, to summarize, given how easy it can be to break C++ building, > and looking at the issues we want to solve, I can propose the following > plan: > > 1. Branch now, hold the pre-release; > 2. Fix the issues above still pending on both master + branch; > 3. Once the issues above are fixed on the branch, issue > the first pre-release. > > What do you guys think? Sounds good to me. Thanks, Pedro Alves