From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10132 invoked by alias); 18 Jan 2003 03:40:27 -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 10084 invoked from network); 18 Jan 2003 03:40:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO crack.them.org) (65.125.64.184) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 18 Jan 2003 03:40:26 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org ([66.93.61.169] ident=mail) by crack.them.org with asmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 18ZljB-00016y-00 for ; Fri, 17 Jan 2003 23:41:10 -0600 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18ZjqO-0004yU-00 for ; Fri, 17 Jan 2003 22:40:28 -0500 Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 03:40:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: GDB `cannotfix' pr state, require PR with xfail `moving forward'. Message-ID: <20030118034028.GA19107@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <200301171945.h0HJjD405622@duracef.shout.net> <20030117194646.GA13074@nevyn.them.org> <3E2863B3.6010207@redhat.com> <20030117201841.GA14124@nevyn.them.org> <3E286D2B.4010605@redhat.com> <20030117220637.GA15625@nevyn.them.org> <3E28918B.4070007@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3E28918B.4070007@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-01/txt/msg00337.txt.bz2 On Fri, Jan 17, 2003 at 06:28:11PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote: > >On Fri, Jan 17, 2003 at 03:52:59PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote: > > > >>>On Fri, Jan 17, 2003 at 03:12:35PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote: > >>> > > > >>>> > > > >>> > > > >>>>>In that case I'd want "broken in all GCC's" to be open rather than > >>>>>suspended. Does this bother anyone? > > > >>> > > > >>>> > >>>>Yes, that bothers me, it would be wrong. The only time a PR is in the > >>>>open state is when no one has looked at it. As soon as someone looks > >>at >>the PR, it should be changed from open to some other state - > >>analized, >>suspended, closed, ... > > > >>> > >>> > >>>Substitute "a state other than suspended or closed". Better? Probably > >>>"analyzed". > > > >> > >>Not really. Analyzed, I think, still implies that it is GDB's problem. > >> Suspended and closed, on the other hand don't > > > > > >We don't work in a void; ideally, we want to fix debug info bugs which > >are still present in current GCC. It seems to me that tracking them in > >the GDB PR system is reasonable. > > Tracking them locally is definitly reasonable, yes. Someone finds a > problem with GDB, searches the bug database and finds, that the problem > is known and in tool XYZ. > > >Hmm, maybe not, maybe file a suspended bug and reference an open one in > >GCC's PRMS. > > Right. Sounds good to me. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer