From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18768 invoked by alias); 11 Sep 2003 17:53:59 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 18759 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2003 17:53:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 11 Sep 2003 17:53:58 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h8BHrvl10350 for ; Thu, 11 Sep 2003 13:53:57 -0400 Received: from pobox.corp.redhat.com (pobox.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.156]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h8BHrue30386 for ; Thu, 11 Sep 2003 13:53:56 -0400 Received: from localhost.redhat.com (devserv.devel.redhat.com [172.16.58.1]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h8BHruba029084 for ; Thu, 11 Sep 2003 13:53:56 -0400 Received: by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 469) id B51732CA3D; Thu, 11 Sep 2003 14:02:50 -0400 (EDT) From: Elena Zannoni MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <16224.47306.505238.29547@localhost.redhat.com> Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 17:53:00 -0000 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: rolling 5.3.92 tomorrow In-Reply-To: <20030911143737.GA22554@nevyn.them.org> References: <3F60852B.50205@redhat.com> <20030911143737.GA22554@nevyn.them.org> X-SW-Source: 2003-09/txt/msg00160.txt.bz2 Daniel Jacobowitz writes: > On Thu, Sep 11, 2003 at 10:22:35AM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote: > > FYI, > > > > Assuming that there aren't any more crasher bugs and the current ones > > are in, I'll roll up another draft 6.0 tomorrow. Hopefully, after that, > > I'll be able to roll out the real thing early next week. > > Great. I have one patch left to check in (ctx->in_reg), I'll do that > today. > > The only other issue I know of is that Mark's per-objfile-data patch, > and my fix for the assertion failures in Java, aren't on the branch > yet. Should we move those patches over? > I don't see why not. They didn't cause any problems in the trunk. elena > -- > Daniel Jacobowitz > MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer