From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2189 invoked by alias); 29 Aug 2002 21:00:30 -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 2182 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2002 21:00:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO redhat.com) (66.30.22.225) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 29 Aug 2002 21:00:28 -0000 Received: by redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 201) id 801571B887; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 17:00:22 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 14:00:00 -0000 From: Christopher Faylor To: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: GDB 5.3 Branch 4th Sept 00:00 GMT Message-ID: <20020829210022.GE23580@redhat.com> Mail-Followup-To: gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <3D6E3FCE.5080500@ges.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3D6E3FCE.5080500@ges.redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23.1i X-SW-Source: 2002-08/txt/msg00403.txt.bz2 On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 11:37:50AM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote: >Hello, > >It looks like this date is going to hold. I'll cut the branch using `-D >2002-09-04' probably 12-24 hrs after the event. This lets me look back >at what was happening around 2002-09-04-gmt and decide if making the cut >really is a good idea :-) Personally, I'd consider the bug that I posted earlier today to be a show stopper since it has the possibility of causing a SEGV from doing a simple gdb operation. Or, maybe I'm the only person around who does a "display /i $pc"... cgf