From: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@br.ibm.com>
To: gdb ml <gdb@sourceware.org>
Cc: "Sérgio Durigan Júnior" <sergiodj@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: suggestion: release GDB 6.8.1
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 03:09:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1217298517.13250.18.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
Hi everybody,
Since the next big GDB release will take a while yet in order to wait
for the current developments to settle down, I'd like to suggest making
a point release to get some patches out there earlier.
In particular, Ulrich Weigand fixed issues with versioned symbols and
plt entries in ppc64-linux which fix a number of failures in the GDB
testsuite and are also easy enough to stumble upon in practice.
Up until now I have the following list of patches which I'd like to
include:
- Re: [RFA] Fix GDB's handling of the inferior controlling terminal.
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-03/msg00126.html
- Fix several PowerPC64 ABI issues
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-05/msg00118.html
- Handle minimal symbols pointing to function descriptors:
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-05/msg00120.html
This one actually depends on a patch which introduces
get_objfile_arch, which in turn depends on a patch reworking DWARF-2
address size handling. Instead of pulling all that, it's easier to
just replace all calls to get_objfile_arch by current_gdbarch.
- Fix stepping into solib function on powerpc64-linux
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-05/msg00451.html
Sérgio already backported the patches above to GDB 6.8 and ran the
testsuite on ppc-linux and ppc64-linux, finding no regressions.
For ppc64, the following improvement is seen:
=== gdb Summary ===
-# of expected passes 12042
-# of unexpected failures 150
+# of expected passes 12080
+# of unexpected failures 112
# of unexpected successes 2
# of expected failures 44
# of known failures 39
# of untested testcases 10
# of unsupported tests 41
Which is nothing to sneeze at. However, current CVS HEAD on the same
machine gives:
=== gdb Summary ===
# of expected passes 12641
# of unexpected failures 73
# of expected failures 41
# of known failures 61
# of unresolved testcases 2
# of untested testcases 10
# of unsupported tests 43
So I guess there are a few other patches worth including in the branch.
I'll see if I can spot them.
--
[]'s
Thiago Jung Bauermann
Software Engineer
IBM Linux Technology Center
next reply other threads:[~2008-07-29 2:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-07-29 3:09 Thiago Jung Bauermann [this message]
2008-08-06 10:48 ` Joel Brobecker
2008-08-06 18:06 ` Doug Evans
2008-08-06 21:45 ` Joel Brobecker
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1217298517.13250.18.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=bauerman@br.ibm.com \
--cc=gdb@sourceware.org \
--cc=sergiodj@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox