From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19419 invoked by alias); 27 Sep 2002 16:40:34 -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 19372 invoked from network); 27 Sep 2002 16:40:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO jackfruit.Stanford.EDU) (171.64.38.136) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 27 Sep 2002 16:40:33 -0000 Received: (from carlton@localhost) by jackfruit.Stanford.EDU (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g8RGeOM32587; Fri, 27 Sep 2002 09:40:24 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: jackfruit.Stanford.EDU: carlton set sender to carlton@math.stanford.edu using -f To: Andrew Cagney Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Outstanding? References: <3D93CD83.5020704@redhat.com> From: David Carlton Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 09:40:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <3D93CD83.5020704@redhat.com> Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.4 (Common Lisp) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2002-09/txt/msg00667.txt.bz2 On Thu, 26 Sep 2002 23:16:19 -0400, Andrew Cagney said: > My pending / sep mail boxes contain the attached. If you see > something that has been resolved, let me know. I think I've gone through and spotted all the ones that are my fault (though, given their number, I probably missed some). If I'm grouping messages together, they all refer to the same thing, so if I say "This has been taken care of" it refers to all the messages right above it. Basically, there's only one issue of mine that's open right now. > DWARF-2, static data members > [David Carlton ] [RFA] DWARF-2, static > data members > [RFA] DWARF-2, static data members This is still outstanding. It's the only thing here that is outstanding; I think the patch is pretty obvious and I would prefer to get it in before 5.3, if possible, but it's not a critical situation. (Basicaly, GCC and GDB both make the same mistake, so everything works fine now.) > [David Carlton ] Re: [RFA] dwarf2read.c: I'm not sure what this is, so I wouldn't worry about it: it's doubtless the same as one of the other messages cited. > [David Carlton ] Re: [RFA] dwarf2read.c: set TYPE_DOMAIN_TYPE correctly for methods > [David Carlton ] [RFA] dwarf2read.c: set TYPE_DOMAIN_TYPE correctly for methods > [RFA] dwarf2read.c: set TYPE_DOMAIN_TYPE correctly for methods This has been taken care of. > [Fwd: superfluous line in hpread.c] > superfluous line in hpread.c This has been taken care of. > dwarf2_build_psymtabs should check that .debug_line exists This has been taken care of. > [RFA] convert blocks to dictionaries, phase 1, main part > [RFA] convert blocks to dictionaries, phase 1, mdebugread.c > [RFC] environment.c > adding namespace support to GDB This is being pulled back and reworked. > [RFA] delete BLOCK_SHOULD_SORT Jim Blandy has responded to it, and right now it's on hold while issues he raised get worked out. (It's not a bug, so there's certainly no reason to worry about it before 5.3 gets released.) > [rfa/c++-testsuite]: printing out methods > [rfa/c++testsuite] (was Re: patch for PR gdb/574) > [rfa/c++testsuite] (was patch for PR gdb/574) > [rfa/testsuite] more tests in gdb.c++/m-static These have been taken care of. > fix for gdb/635 > references to uninitialized static const members This has been taken care of. David Carlton carlton@math.stanford.edu