From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25736 invoked by alias); 19 Apr 2014 08:28:41 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 25725 invoked by uid 89); 19 Apr 2014 08:28:41 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_SOFTFAIL autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mtaout20.012.net.il Received: from mtaout20.012.net.il (HELO mtaout20.012.net.il) (80.179.55.166) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Sat, 19 Apr 2014 08:28:40 +0000 Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout20.012.net.il by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0N4900100R9CJ000@a-mtaout20.012.net.il> for gdb@sourceware.org; Sat, 19 Apr 2014 11:28:37 +0300 (IDT) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0N49001GCRJPH510@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Sat, 19 Apr 2014 11:28:37 +0300 (IDT) Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2014 15:25:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: quick update on the GDB 7.7.1 and GDB 7.8 releases In-reply-to: <20140417201118.GK12882@adacore.com> To: Joel Brobecker Cc: gdb@sourceware.org Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii Message-id: <83eh0thge0.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20140417181903.GH12882@adacore.com> <8338hbiv87.fsf@gnu.org> <20140417201118.GK12882@adacore.com> X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-04/txt/msg00066.txt.bz2 > Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 13:11:18 -0700 > From: Joel Brobecker > Cc: gdb@sourceware.org > > > > We are about 2.5 weeks away from our tentative 7.7.1 release. > > > AFAIK, there are no blocking issues for that release, so if you > > > have anything that should be going in 7.7.1, please hurry! :) > > > > I'd like to have the "PC register not available" bug solved in the > > MinGW build, but I need to hear the final OK for that. > > I agree that it would be nice to have that fix, and we should try > to have it in as soon as possible to widen the testing field as > much as we can before branching. I don't think there is any hold up, > though, as my understanding is that both Pedro and I gave the OK > for the GDB side of the fix. The GDBserver side, if relevant, > can be handled independently. Thanks, I committed the GDB parts. See my mail to gdb-patches for what I actually committed.