From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7201 invoked by alias); 17 Jan 2009 03:09:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 7191 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Jan 2009 03:08:59 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sat, 17 Jan 2009 03:08:27 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E418C2A96A5; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 22:08:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id jWUpOX-1GgxR; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 22:08:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7344A2A96A3; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 22:08:25 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A35A5E7ACD; Sat, 17 Jan 2009 07:07:58 +0400 (RET) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 03:09:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Joel Sherrill Cc: "gdb@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: Discussing the next GDB release (GDB 7.0?) Message-ID: <20090117030758.GG5709@adacore.com> References: <20090115034552.GF24105@adacore.com> <497099C1.7020103@oarcorp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <497099C1.7020103@oarcorp.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-01/txt/msg00102.txt.bz2 > I have run into a case where gcc svn miscompiles > psim on x86_64. It is reported as GCC PR 38587. > > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38587 > > I know it is a gcc bug. I don't think it is a blocker > for gdb 7.0. Indeed. If the problem was appearing with a released version of GCC, we might want to try to find a work-around (eg: compile that file at -O0), and document the problem. -- Joel