bugzilla vs dejagnu

bugzilla vs dejagnu

[Andrew Cagney]

A thread on oversears@ brings up an interesting point.

Where's GDB at with respect to migrating from dejagnu to bugzilla, is 
there still an intent for this to happen?

Re: bugzilla vs dejagnu

[Daniel Jacobowitz]

On Mon, Mar 06, 2006 at 02:23:50PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> A thread on oversears@ brings up an interesting point.
> 
> Where's GDB at with respect to migrating from dejagnu to bugzilla, is 
> there still an intent for this to happen?

I assume you mean GNATS to bugzilla?

I still want it to happen.  But I don't think anyone had decided what
to do about all the GNATS PR numbers in DejaGNU; we could preserve
them, but only by setting up a separate bugzilla installation, instead
of sharing with the rest of sourceware (and I think sharing the
installation would be in our best interests).

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery

Re: bugzilla vs dejagnu

[Andreas Schwab]

Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org> writes:

> I still want it to happen.  But I don't think anyone had decided what
> to do about all the GNATS PR numbers in DejaGNU; we could preserve
> them, but only by setting up a separate bugzilla installation, instead
> of sharing with the rest of sourceware (and I think sharing the
> installation would be in our best interests).

Currently the highest GNATS PR number for gdb is 2096, which is much lower
than the highest PR number in the sourceware bugzilla, so it we would just
have to document that PR numbers < x refer to GNATS, everything else to
bugzilla.

Andreas.

-- 
Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, schwab@suse.de
SuSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
PGP key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756  01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."

Re: bugzilla vs dejagnu

[Daniel Jacobowitz]

On Mon, Mar 06, 2006 at 08:59:34PM +0100, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org> writes:
> 
> > I still want it to happen.  But I don't think anyone had decided what
> > to do about all the GNATS PR numbers in DejaGNU; we could preserve
> > them, but only by setting up a separate bugzilla installation, instead
> > of sharing with the rest of sourceware (and I think sharing the
> > installation would be in our best interests).
> 
> Currently the highest GNATS PR number for gdb is 2096, which is much lower
> than the highest PR number in the sourceware bugzilla, so it we would just
> have to document that PR numbers < x refer to GNATS, everything else to
> bugzilla.

Yes, that is probably the best way.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery

Re: bugzilla vs gnats (nee dejagnu :-)

[Andrew Cagney]

Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 06, 2006 at 08:59:34PM +0100, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> 
>>Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org> writes:
>>
>>
>>>I still want it to happen.  But I don't think anyone had decided what
>>>to do about all the GNATS PR numbers in DejaGNU; we could preserve
>>>them, but only by setting up a separate bugzilla installation, instead
>>>of sharing with the rest of sourceware (and I think sharing the
>>>installation would be in our best interests).
>>
>>Currently the highest GNATS PR number for gdb is 2096, which is much lower
>>than the highest PR number in the sourceware bugzilla, so it we would just
>>have to document that PR numbers < x refer to GNATS, everything else to
>>bugzilla.
> 
> 
> Yes, that is probably the best way.
> 

Jim, this is the thread I was refering to,

I think the only potential question left here is gcc or sourceware (I'm 
guessing sourceware but it never hurts to put the question).

Andrew

Re: bugzilla vs dejagnu

[Mark Kettenis]

> Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 14:23:50 -0500
> From: Andrew Cagney <cagney@redhat.com>
> 
> A thread on oversears@ brings up an interesting point.
> 
> Where's GDB at with respect to migrating from dejagnu to bugzilla, is 
> there still an intent for this to happen?

Heh, I hope you're talking about gnats instead of dejagnu.

In that case, my answer is that I'm not planning to do the work ;-).

Mark