From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id iGNtOJ8572WmrQIAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 11 Mar 2024 13:04:31 -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=fedw0i1Y; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id E366F1E0D2; Mon, 11 Mar 2024 13:04:31 -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 D2CC31E0AC for ; Mon, 11 Mar 2024 13:04:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A6B6385842B for ; Mon, 11 Mar 2024 17:04:29 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 7A6B6385842B DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1710176669; bh=Vx/6OF9lQwxmsjeIuoMifRMQemT9JDQK9rULS9Ig1ao=; h=To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From:Reply-To:From; b=fedw0i1YTlT+Gu+46YVNAonnsypoKaHitfgRWi/Bb072BrUNZErR2+aAHUVE2hvOi orbnnp+nNlMQBZxwsIlRdRqyud3YoOwg5AolnniV3ViDaqI+E9LIUDPKw1C9hOdFyX ae3/jvxW9tlhZOUZnU3fUm5+W1zx/JTLUjgIEhqc= Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (woodpecker.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 078DA3858D20 for ; Mon, 11 Mar 2024 17:03:44 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 078DA3858D20 ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 078DA3858D20 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1710176626; cv=none; b=pa6dJzf+qnKPGx15rz9SjmR5+L6/7WeB7p1DXGgX5X3kqFMKmqsWRBQDuLrWXBKDpiQO/+GQn7tOKwvNCrkR7vlX8Ud+nwI5AaurSRZPHviRZKHb3gJafx/CT327JGOQDdmvWCXOsSQMwtCc5awFiDkCyPcjTl3e/FpVWTPCXpI= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1710176626; c=relaxed/simple; bh=YI896u1XDG9TtTHM7xe2LLHRzNF8lKjvZIW6W8DKxis=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version; b=D2dLw/j65KvKVZ0TlftclIqXnpOaZrwrbLLASi/twTuTNupD0j6KJnflI9e0ReLv2E7f2AU+NRVR6Inucunc9Y9dYFSklQjd9ihaIZBHigTqCKm1h4Y7HRNgfeN488UVBjVVVTExLISuhbU29UQ/1WjWH/DCF20oSi2tqbhJsYs= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org To: Simon Marchi Cc: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Updating libbacktrace In-Reply-To: <7bf4f993-11d6-4b5c-a70b-cbbe00399952@simark.ca> (Simon Marchi's message of "Mon, 11 Mar 2024 11:30:16 -0400") Organization: Gentoo References: <87plw4r5ta.fsf@gentoo.org> <7bf4f993-11d6-4b5c-a70b-cbbe00399952@simark.ca> User-Agent: mu4e 1.12.0; emacs 30.0.50 Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2024 17:03:39 +0000 Message-ID: <87h6hcog44.fsf@gentoo.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS, TXREP, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no 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: Sam James via Gdb Reply-To: Sam James Errors-To: gdb-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb" Simon Marchi writes: > 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, Hi Simon, > > The easiest would be if you sent a patch to gdb-patches (and maybe CC > binutils) for it. Will do. Sorry, I should've just done that, probably. > > Thanks, > > Simon thanks, sam