From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2481 invoked by alias); 12 Feb 2002 02:54:32 -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 2211 invoked from network); 12 Feb 2002 02:54:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO duracef.shout.net) (204.253.184.12) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 12 Feb 2002 02:54:28 -0000 Received: (from mec@localhost) by duracef.shout.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g1C2sPg30970; Mon, 11 Feb 2002 20:54:25 -0600 Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 18:54:00 -0000 From: Michael Elizabeth Chastain Message-Id: <200202120254.g1C2sPg30970@duracef.shout.net> To: ac131313@cygnus.com Subject: Re: When may I close a 5.1.1 PR? Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com X-SW-Source: 2002-02/txt/msg00179.txt.bz2 Andrew Cagney writes: > I'm just happy to see the problem and fix recorded. Probably close it > since I assume no one has any intention of fixing it on the branch. That works for me. I'll review some more of the open bugs and see if they are fixed in HEAD now. > I was thinking that it should just jump to the bug database. However, > looking around I've noticed that other projects have (for an equivalent > page) used it to ``educate'' the reader as to how to submit a better bug > report and where to find potential fixes.. I'm not sure we want to go > down that path. I like this idea. We see a lot of reports that do not include the target architecture or the version string. Also it's very useful to see what compiler the user built their program with. It's a service to us if the bug reports are better to begin with. It would be a service to the users if we say: if your gdb is version 4.18 or 5.0, then you should upgrade to 5.1.1 or the latest CVS version before sending a letter at all. Michael C