From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14257 invoked by alias); 11 Aug 2004 03:53:09 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 14250 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2004 03:53:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO aragorn.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.23) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 11 Aug 2004 03:53:08 -0000 Received: from zaretski ([80.230.159.46]) by aragorn.inter.net.il (MOS 3.4.6-GR) with ESMTP id EDM07987; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 06:52:54 +0300 (IDT) Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 03:53:00 -0000 From: "Eli Zaretskii" To: Andrew Cagney Message-Id: <6654-Wed11Aug2004065005+0300-eliz@gnu.org> CC: kettenis@chello.nl, mec.gnu@mindspring.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <411961FC.4010007@gnu.org> (message from Andrew Cagney on Tue, 10 Aug 2004 20:02:04 -0400) Subject: Re: [PATCH] Improve i386 prologue analyzer Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <200408012158.i71LwpRw033840@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> <3405-Mon02Aug2004070159+0300-eliz@gnu.org> <410EAFBB.5080102@gnu.org> <2914-Tue03Aug2004065313+0300-eliz@gnu.org> <200408061933.i76JX3HJ008032@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> <4113EA3B.3000900@gnu.org> <2914-Sat07Aug2004183455+0300-eliz@gnu.org> <41150161.3000306@gnu.org> <41155A83.nail9VC11PTRT@mindspring.com> <7704-Sun08Aug2004065437+0300-eliz@gnu.org> <4115FF44.nail59F11C8I0@mindspring.com> <200408081108.i78B8Cpk009362@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> <411633BE.2010809@gnu.org> <7137-Sun08Aug2004223001+0300-eliz@gnu.org> <4116AEA1.7060900@gnu.org> <2914-Mon09Aug2004220629+0300-eliz@gnu.org> <411961FC.4010007@gnu.org> X-SW-Source: 2004-08/txt/msg00383.txt.bz2 > Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 20:02:04 -0400 > From: Andrew Cagney > > However, now that we've got the MIPS patched up, I see no good reason > for holding it back. We are talking about two weeks, not about months or something. Why is it worthwhile to go through the pains of another version just so the MIPS patch could be released a week or two earlier than if it were to be part of the same version as the i386 prologue patch?