ready for the GDB 17.2 corrective release?

ready for the GDB 17.2 corrective release?

[Joel Brobecker]

Hi everyone,

It's been 4 months since we released GDB 17.1, so time to publish
a corrective release. So far, we have 12 confirmed fixes, with
a 13th one where I suspect the fix is in and we just forgot to close
the PR.

As of now, I propose the following release date for 17.2:

        Sat-Sun May 02-03

Are there any other issues that we know of that we have identified
as must-fix for 17.2?  Please let us know if you think there are blocking
items, as otherwise the date above is when I intend to publish the next
release.

Thank you!

-- 
Joel

Re: ready for the GDB 17.2 corrective release?

[Tom de Vries]

On 4/19/26 3:57 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> 
> It's been 4 months since we released GDB 17.1, so time to publish
> a corrective release. So far, we have 12 confirmed fixes, with
> a 13th one where I suspect the fix is in and we just forgot to close
> the PR.
> 
> As of now, I propose the following release date for 17.2:
> 
>          Sat-Sun May 02-03
> 
> Are there any other issues that we know of that we have identified
> as must-fix for 17.2?  Please let us know if you think there are blocking
> items, as otherwise the date above is when I intend to publish the next
> release.

Hi Joel,

I'd like to nominate PR31449 [1] and PR33794 [2].  They're both crashes 
that happen when querying the user about enabling debuginfod while 
enabling TUI.

I've submitted low-risk patches for both PRs ( 
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2026-April/226551.html ).

I'm not sure if the PRs are severe enough to block the release for: 
crashes are serious, but the likelihood that such a crash will trigger 
is not high, I think, which is probably why we have lived with it, 
probably since the query was introduced in 2021.

But the fact that low-risk patches are available might be reason enough 
to consider including them.

Thanks,
- Tom

> 
> Thank you!
> 

[1] https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31449
[2] https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33794

Re: ready for the GDB 17.2 corrective release?

[Joel Brobecker]

Hi Tom,

> I'd like to nominate PR31449 [1] and PR33794 [2].  They're both crashes that
> happen when querying the user about enabling debuginfod while enabling TUI.
> 
> I've submitted low-risk patches for both PRs (
> https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2026-April/226551.html ).
> 
> I'm not sure if the PRs are severe enough to block the release for: crashes
> are serious, but the likelihood that such a crash will trigger is not high,
> I think, which is probably why we have lived with it, probably since the
> query was introduced in 2021.
> 
> But the fact that low-risk patches are available might be reason enough to
> consider including them.

Thanks for pointing those two PRs out. Let's start by marking them as
targetting 17.2 for the time being, so we don't forget about them.

How soon do you anticipate you'll be able to have those changes pushed?
There are really two things to consider:

  * Are the patches suitable for the 17 branch? If they are low risk
    and prevent a crash, that seems like an easy "yes".

  * Are the issues problematic-enough that we would want to wait extra
    for them. The answer depends on how frequently we think people
    are going to hit the issue.

    If this issue is a regression of release 17 compared to release 16,
    this changes the perspective as well.

I have no strong opinion either way, FWIW.

-- 
Joel

Re: ready for the GDB 17.2 corrective release?

[Tom de Vries]

On 4/20/26 8:32 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> Hi Tom,
> 
>> I'd like to nominate PR31449 [1] and PR33794 [2].  They're both crashes that
>> happen when querying the user about enabling debuginfod while enabling TUI.
>>
>> I've submitted low-risk patches for both PRs (
>> https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2026-April/226551.html ).
>>
>> I'm not sure if the PRs are severe enough to block the release for: crashes
>> are serious, but the likelihood that such a crash will trigger is not high,
>> I think, which is probably why we have lived with it, probably since the
>> query was introduced in 2021.
>>
>> But the fact that low-risk patches are available might be reason enough to
>> consider including them.
> 
> Thanks for pointing those two PRs out. Let's start by marking them as
> targetting 17.2 for the time being, so we don't forget about them.
> 
> How soon do you anticipate you'll be able to have those changes pushed?

Well, they're waiting for review.

> There are really two things to consider:
> 
>    * Are the patches suitable for the 17 branch? If they are low risk
>      and prevent a crash, that seems like an easy "yes".
Yes, they are.

>    * Are the issues problematic-enough that we would want to wait extra
>      for them. The answer depends on how frequently we think people
>      are going to hit the issue.

Right.

> 
>      If this issue is a regression of release 17 compared to release 16,
>      this changes the perspective as well.
> 

It's not a regression AFAIK.

> I have no strong opinion either way, FWIW.
> 

Ack, thanks.
  -Tom

Re: ready for the GDB 17.2 corrective release?

[Andrew Burgess]

Tom de Vries <tdevries@suse.de> writes:

> On 4/20/26 8:32 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote:
>> Hi Tom,
>> 
>>> I'd like to nominate PR31449 [1] and PR33794 [2].  They're both crashes that
>>> happen when querying the user about enabling debuginfod while enabling TUI.
>>>
>>> I've submitted low-risk patches for both PRs (
>>> https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2026-April/226551.html ).
>>>
>>> I'm not sure if the PRs are severe enough to block the release for: crashes
>>> are serious, but the likelihood that such a crash will trigger is not high,
>>> I think, which is probably why we have lived with it, probably since the
>>> query was introduced in 2021.
>>>
>>> But the fact that low-risk patches are available might be reason enough to
>>> consider including them.
>> 
>> Thanks for pointing those two PRs out. Let's start by marking them as
>> targetting 17.2 for the time being, so we don't forget about them.
>> 
>> How soon do you anticipate you'll be able to have those changes pushed?
>
> Well, they're waiting for review.

I'll try to look at these either today, or Thu/Fri this week.  If
someone else wants to look first, then feel free :)

Thanks,
Andrew