From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22548 invoked by alias); 2 Oct 2009 02:46:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 22533 invoked by uid 22791); 2 Oct 2009 02:46:18 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SARE_LWSHORTT X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mout1.freenet.de (HELO mout1.freenet.de) (195.4.92.91) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 02 Oct 2009 02:46:13 +0000 Received: from [195.4.92.16] (helo=6.mx.freenet.de) by mout1.freenet.de with esmtpa (ID ralf.corsepius@freenet.de) (port 25) (Exim 4.69 #92) id 1MtY9Y-00053F-QV; Fri, 02 Oct 2009 04:45:52 +0200 Received: from hsi-kbw-078-043-063-233.hsi4.kabel-badenwuerttemberg.de ([78.43.63.233]:60877 helo=[192.168.1.104]) by 6.mx.freenet.de with esmtpsa (ID ralf.corsepius@freenet.de) (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (port 465) (Exim 4.69 #94) id 1MtY9Y-0001Pr-L6; Fri, 02 Oct 2009 04:45:52 +0200 Message-ID: <4AC5695E.6040109@rtems.org> Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2009 02:46:00 -0000 From: Ralf Corsepius User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.1) Gecko/20090814 Fedora/3.0-2.6.b3.fc11 Thunderbird/3.0b3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Joel Brobecker CC: Ralf Corsepius , Jan Kratochvil , gdb@sourceware.org, Tom Tromey Subject: Re: GDB 6.8.92 available for testing References: <20090930204828.GB31446@adacore.com> <4AC41F44.1040502@rtems.org> <20091001100900.GA16002@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <4AC4904C.8040204@rtems.org> <20091001171156.GD6532@adacore.com> In-Reply-To: <20091001171156.GD6532@adacore.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2009-10/txt/msg00034.txt.bz2 On 10/01/2009 07:11 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote: >> You are forgetting about the 3rd parties, which apply distros as their >> basis. > > Just to be clear: No one has any obligation towards you or us. Right, but ... My definition of a bug is "something which doesn't work as advertised" --enable-system-readline is of this kind > We all > make the code available in some form, but we all have local modifications > that we have not submitted for one reason or another. You probably have > your local modifications too, so why not just add Red Hat's patch in > your list, That's what I already did. > and then work on helping us fixing the problem that causes > this patch to be necessary? I am more than willing to assist you in doing so, but this is the long term solution. A short term solution is to apply one of the proposals to upstream gdb, even though they are "hackerish". Being perfectionistic and forcing users to cope with known bugs isn't helpful to anybody. Neither to the FSF, to upstream gdb, rtems.org nor OS distributors nor other arbitrary users (users: here: people building gdb from sources). Ralf