From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22741 invoked by alias); 26 Sep 2002 21:05:30 -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 22734 invoked from network); 26 Sep 2002 21:05:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (216.138.202.10) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 26 Sep 2002 21:05:29 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC4893DC7; Thu, 26 Sep 2002 17:05:29 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3D937699.3020502@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 14:05:00 -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: David Carlton Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: GDB PR categories References: <3D934F11.6050809@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-09/txt/msg00455.txt.bz2 > * If you're going to create so many categories, how about one for each > debugging format as well? I think it might confuse things. The only way the average user is going to spot a symtab bug is by GDB printing out: internal-error: symtab.c: ..... :-) > * Another thing to consider kind of reflecting is the testsuite: so > arch, asm, base, c++, (chill), disasm, fortran, gdb, hp, java, log, > mi, stabs, sum, threads, trace. Maybe that would be a good place to > start from; and then, as we noticed that there were, say, a large > number of bugs about a specific subcategory of one of those > categories, we could fork off a separate PR/testsuite category for > it? GDB's testsuite directory is split more along functional lines. > Though, now that I think about it, the two lists of categories > shouldn't be identical: if a bug currently is present only on a > particular platform but the command sequence to manifest that bug > makes sense on any platform, then the testsuite case shouldn't be > placed in a platform-specific location. Yes. Most test cases are generic. The only non-generic directory is gdb.arch where tests need to verify the exact value of registers. Separatly I was wondering about a test-bug `class'. > * I definitely think that doing this incrementally would be a good > idea; you've proposed more than 50 categories, and there are only Dam! You spotted my cunning plan. I was going to spread the bugs so thinly that no one could find them and hence think GDB had no problems ;-) > 476 non-closed PR's, so probably some of the categories would be too > sparse to bother with for now. Maybe you could follow the 'os' lead > and have 'other arch' and 'other language' categories (where, say, > pascal/scheme/ada/objc could be in the latter but c++ and java get > their own PR categories), forking off a new arch/language/os > whenever the appropriate 'other' category gets too large to > conveniently browse. Yes, that makes sense. If there is an active maintainer create the category otherwize leave it for ``other'': arch-i386 arch-mips os-GNU/Linux os-bsd lang-c++ ???-thread ???-macro ui-misc ui-mi ui-tui I just wonder if somone will get confused by having to choose between ``other arch/lang/os/ui/... I guess create xxx-other on demand as well. (BTW, anyone know the story with ``-'' in categories. I think fernando indicated that it wasn't valid but the online docs (http://www.gnu.org/software/gnats/ uses that in the examples.) thanks, Andrew