From: teawater <teawater@gmail.com>
To: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
Cc: "David Daney" <ddaney@caviumnetworks.com>,
gdb@sourceware.org,
"Sérgio Durigan Júnior" <sergiodj@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Discussing the next GDB release (GDB 7.0?)
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 06:32:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <daef60380901152231x11944de5od7fb9877c5f50775@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090116033948.GI31296@adacore.com>
Thanks Joel,
About process record, there were a lot of discussion with it and most
of them were fixed.
So in the third time submit, I think most parts of process record are
OK. But after that, I didn't get approve (I just got the approve of
doc from Eli).
And I think "catch syscall" meet the same problem too. Sérgio send 3
PINGs for third submit.
Please help us with it.
The follow links are for process record and replay submit first time:
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-11/msg00096.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-11/msg00097.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-11/msg00098.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-11/msg00099.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-11/msg00100.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-11/msg00101.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-11/msg00102.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-11/msg00103.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-11/msg00104.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-11/msg00105.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-11/msg00106.html
The follow links are for process record and replay submit second time:
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-11/msg00394.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-11/msg00395.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-11/msg00396.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-11/msg00397.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-11/msg00398.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-11/msg00399.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-11/msg00400.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-11/msg00401.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-11/msg00402.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-11/msg00403.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-11/msg00404.html
The follow links are for process record and replay submit third time:
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-01/msg00125.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-01/msg00126.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-01/msg00127.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-01/msg00128.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-01/msg00129.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-01/msg00130.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-01/msg00131.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-01/msg00132.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-01/msg00133.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-01/msg00134.html
The follow links are for 'catch syscall' feature submit first time:
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-09/msg00583.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-09/msg00584.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-09/msg00585.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-09/msg00587.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-09/msg00586.html
The follow links are for 'catch syscall' feature submit second time:
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-11/msg00016.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-11/msg00019.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-11/msg00017.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-11/msg00020.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-11/msg00018.html
The follow links are for 'catch syscall' feature submit third time:
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-11/msg00449.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-11/msg00450.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-11/msg00451.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-11/msg00452.html
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-11/msg00453.html
Thanks,
Hui
On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 11:39, Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com> wrote:
> Hi Teawater,
>
>> > Do we need process record and replay in 7.0 release?
>> > It's in submit process.
>
>> And catch syscall? I think it hang too.
>
> Neither of these features seem critical to me, but that's only
> a personal opinion. As GDB Maintainer, I think of my role as being
> the technician that implements the recommendations of the GDB
> Maintainers. If the maintainers think this is critical, then
> I'll add them to the list as blocking for the release.
>
> That being said, this does not mean that they will not make it
> for the release. If they get checked in before we branch, then
> they're in...
>
> Regarding the "process record" series of patches, I hesitate to
> review them, because I know there has been some discussion that
> I had to zap because I was too busy at the time. Hopefully the
> persons involved in the discussion at the time can also review
> your patches. If not, I'll be home by the end of the month -
> could you send me personally the links to the discussions and
> the patches, and I'll try to take a look.
>
> Regarding the "catch syscall", same thing. There was a long debate,
> and I zappped it. Same suggestion.
>
> --
> Joel
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-16 6:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-15 3:46 Joel Brobecker
2009-01-15 4:18 ` Eli Zaretskii
2009-01-15 10:43 ` Vladimir Prus
2009-01-15 17:12 ` Joel Brobecker
2009-01-15 17:17 ` Tom Tromey
2009-01-15 17:24 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2009-01-15 17:31 ` Joel Brobecker
2009-01-28 3:49 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2009-01-30 0:43 ` Joel Brobecker
2009-02-02 13:48 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2009-02-04 19:17 ` Tom Tromey
2009-02-06 0:48 ` Joel Brobecker
2009-01-15 17:24 ` David Daney
2009-01-15 17:37 ` Joel Brobecker
2009-01-15 23:54 ` teawater
2009-01-16 2:29 ` teawater
2009-01-16 3:40 ` Joel Brobecker
2009-01-16 6:32 ` teawater [this message]
2009-01-16 16:24 ` Tom Tromey
2009-01-16 14:30 ` Marc Khouzam
2009-01-20 18:25 ` Jakob Engblom
2009-01-21 0:18 ` teawater
2009-01-21 3:16 ` teawater
2009-01-27 5:09 ` Michael Snyder
2009-01-27 5:01 ` Michael Snyder
2009-01-30 0:48 ` Joel Brobecker
2009-01-16 3:47 ` Joel Brobecker
2009-01-16 5:48 ` Paul Pluzhnikov
2009-01-16 8:46 ` Eli Zaretskii
2009-01-16 14:55 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2009-01-16 14:30 ` Joel Sherrill
2009-01-17 3:09 ` Joel Brobecker
2009-01-20 8:09 ` Nathan Sidwell
2009-01-20 10:41 ` Joel Brobecker
2009-01-20 11:25 ` Nathan Sidwell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=daef60380901152231x11944de5od7fb9877c5f50775@mail.gmail.com \
--to=teawater@gmail.com \
--cc=brobecker@adacore.com \
--cc=ddaney@caviumnetworks.com \
--cc=gdb@sourceware.org \
--cc=sergiodj@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox