Re: GDB 5.3.1 vs 5.4/6.0

[Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com>]

> I recommend the way I've been doing binutils releases: leave the branch
> open for a little, and if people find things that they want fixed in a
> new release and handle getting them onto the branch, then do a 5.3.1
> release.  Don't soak massive development time into it.

Yes.  Play it by ear.

 > I have one
> issue that I would probably want fixed in a 5.3.1, which is that
> putting "call" in a breakpoints command list _still_ segfaults;
> there're two patches for this still awaiting review.
> 
> One issue by itself isn't really enough to bother, though.
> 
> Re multiarch: HP/PA is progressing and I can help on that if needed; I
> can even do the m32r if there is a perception that we still need it (is
> there?) since there conveniently are GCC, sim, and binutils ports to
> this target.  z8k has binutils and sim but no GCC port as far as I can
> see; I could do it blindly, though, I wager - it's an impressively
> minimal GDB port.  So if we want to hold out for multi-arch I bet we
> could do it.

Apparently there is an unofficial z8k compiler port somewhere.  The 
target should always be deleted rather than speculative converted.  cf 
the mn10200 which should have been deleted years ago.

I don't know of a good reason for hanging onto the m32r.

Andrew