From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id QxvtALkj72V5lAIAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 11 Mar 2024 11:31:05 -0400 Authentication-Results: simark.ca; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; secure) header.d=sourceware.org header.i=@sourceware.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=B+1ITjpO; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id E976F1E0D2; Mon, 11 Mar 2024 11:31:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D6E7E1E0AC for ; Mon, 11 Mar 2024 11:31:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09F103858439 for ; Mon, 11 Mar 2024 15:31:02 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 09F103858439 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1710171062; bh=/xV2hbpOcG/zUdsCPrd/ENcav0jmKNrBlqP7U5mfgn4=; h=Date:Subject:To:References:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To: From; b=B+1ITjpOOh6u1udFezyOVz1zITWwbV+OQItNAyqUxUEPqi0IJ5jwokDjC6gER32/Q dDXzZB1uDAX0H7C4I+MZ7zAA7cSCTN7tSO7hDmMn1GF+fLMbaNcQ92oKlha7FN4dco tnWi88g6pdLCGXLnS41/qBsWhYB2EMcumL8P7Q8s= Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0F7F23858D20 for ; Mon, 11 Mar 2024 15:30:19 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 0F7F23858D20 ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 0F7F23858D20 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1710171020; cv=none; b=tQKW/mkLwnWHdyk15OtqBbKJzlPGmIP6ZYL/qu4/FYmDX+baIi/yGOSftB81BcfHu2Pdo3VLye4we08JDjiJ6qP7S1Rm2veOECZnQWG5zVTiGtoRdvW+z9WqZA21F04WSwSNANoszSARdFxWjRIxTROLKVZIts433vBcMemZPJY= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1710171020; c=relaxed/simple; bh=u/AANold2R6iHUbj01Cq/rkU0K0i8R/9DD9hYiBy7wA=; h=DKIM-Signature:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:From; b=jBg+66KmEoSD1NBB3rwryRoHZL44aHZddsCXc85h0J76jFNfOk68ZQfuchvfmOJo3c9p1fkQj4zt63AhdDwswljWIhpKb6ws6g+ikl78g+gehQjuhCBCQ4kYz5fobSJK4JpZLUSu6uZ11HXkqDRWglm1AoOBA4eCyJmVhJ9BnVM= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org Received: from [172.16.0.192] (192-222-143-198.qc.cable.ebox.net [192.222.143.198]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 68BE61E0AC; Mon, 11 Mar 2024 11:30:17 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <7bf4f993-11d6-4b5c-a70b-cbbe00399952@simark.ca> Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2024 11:30:16 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: Updating libbacktrace To: Sam James , gdb@sourceware.org References: <87plw4r5ta.fsf@gentoo.org> Content-Language: fr In-Reply-To: <87plw4r5ta.fsf@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS, TXREP, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gdb@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Simon Marchi via Gdb Reply-To: Simon Marchi Errors-To: gdb-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb" On 3/8/24 12:28, Sam James via Gdb wrote: > Hi all, > > Could one of the GDB global maintainers possibly update libbacktrace > from the copy in gcc.git? > > I'm also happy to do it if delegated to. Whatever works for me. > > I originally asked at https://sourceware.org/PR31327 (as it fixes some > test failures) where Ian ACKed it, but wasn't sure of the policy on > it. Nick, the binutils maintainer, deferred to GDB as GDB is the primary > consumer of libbacktrace. > > Nick also suggested we clarify its status in MAINTAINERS. > > thanks, > sam Hi Sam, The easiest would be if you sent a patch to gdb-patches (and maybe CC binutils) for it. Thanks, Simon