From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14943 invoked by alias); 5 Dec 2002 23:51:44 -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 14935 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 23:51:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO jackfruit.Stanford.EDU) (171.64.38.136) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 23:51:43 -0000 Received: (from carlton@localhost) by jackfruit.Stanford.EDU (8.11.6/8.11.6) id gB5NpbY22491; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 15:51:37 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: jackfruit.Stanford.EDU: carlton set sender to carlton@math.stanford.edu using -f To: Elena Zannoni Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, Jim Blandy Subject: Re: PING [RFA] DWARF-2, static data members References: <15855.46570.409897.896793@localhost.redhat.com> <15855.58328.854004.977049@localhost.redhat.com> From: David Carlton Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 16:16:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <15855.58328.854004.977049@localhost.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: 2002-12/txt/msg00212.txt.bz2 On Thu, 5 Dec 2002 18:40:08 -0500, Elena Zannoni said: > David Carlton writes: >> On Thu, 5 Dec 2002 15:24:10 -0500, Elena Zannoni said: >>> Was the patch to gcc submitted, or the gcc PR fixed otherwise? >> No, I can't submit the patch to GCC until a version of GDB >> including this patch is released, because otherwise they'll emit >> debugging info that we can't handle. > I know, but I figured that, given their 'freeze' cycles, it could > get reviewed in the meantime. That's a good point. If my patch had made it into 5.3, then I'd be tempted to send it to the GCC folks now, but 5.3 has been frozen so that didn't happen. I don't have enough experience with how GDB's and GCC's release cycles work to know when it's best to submit it to GCC, but I'm pretty leery about doing so until I have a good idea as to when my patch will make it into a released version of GDB. Especially since the matter at hand really is pretty unimportant, so I don't think there's much reason to try to optimize the process in this situation. > Speaking of which, I've heard rumours that the Dberlin patch for > namespace debug info has been reviewed... Indeed it has: > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-11/msg00978.html Yeah, so I heard. So matters are progressing nicely on that front. David Carlton carlton@math.stanford.edu