From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 43335 invoked by alias); 17 Jan 2018 16:38:26 -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 43325 invoked by uid 89); 17 Jan 2018 16:38:25 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=exchange 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 ESMTP; Wed, 17 Jan 2018 16:38:20 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C9C9A7F7A2; Wed, 17 Jan 2018 16:38:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (unused-10-15-17-193.yyz.redhat.com [10.15.17.193]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8198917D43; Wed, 17 Jan 2018 16:38:09 +0000 (UTC) From: Sergio Durigan Junior To: Pedro Alves Cc: Eli Zaretskii , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] GDB 8.1 release branch created! References: <83h8rlyakm.fsf@gnu.org> <87po69zkxe.fsf@redhat.com> <87po69y20p.fsf@redhat.com> <35b739f2-19b5-bc4f-9c48-b133edf2412e@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 16:38:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <35b739f2-19b5-bc4f-9c48-b133edf2412e@redhat.com> (Pedro Alves's message of "Wed, 17 Jan 2018 11:04:36 +0000") Message-ID: <87r2qofnkf.fsf@redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2018-01/txt/msg00343.txt.bz2 On Wednesday, January 17 2018, Pedro Alves wrote: > On 01/16/2018 08:36 PM, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote: > >> I'm not sure why this one is happening. I think it has something to do >> with the fact that we're declaring "maybe_restore_inferior" as >> gdb::optional, because scoped_restore_current_inferior's constructor >> already takes care of initializing "m_saved_inf" (same goes for >> scoped_restore_current_program_space). > > https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-05/msg00130.html Ah, there you go. Thanks, Pedro. I had missed that exchange of messages. -- Sergio GPG key ID: 237A 54B1 0287 28BF 00EF 31F4 D0EB 7628 65FC 5E36 Please send encrypted e-mail if possible http://sergiodj.net/