From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3312 invoked by alias); 5 Sep 2002 19:45:43 -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 3302 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2002 19:45:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (66.30.197.194) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 5 Sep 2002 19:45:42 -0000 Received: from ges.redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 538D23CE1; Thu, 5 Sep 2002 15:45:40 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3D77B464.2070403@ges.redhat.com> Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2002 12:45:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020824 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Christopher Faylor Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: GDB 5.3 Branch 4th Sept 00:00 GMT References: <3D6E3FCE.5080500@ges.redhat.com> <20020829210022.GE23580@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-09/txt/msg00022.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"... FYI, I've posted a patch to fix this. I'm planning on pulling it into the 5.3 branch. Andrew