From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20730 invoked by alias); 24 Jan 2006 21:12:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 20721 invoked by uid 22791); 24 Jan 2006 21:12:17 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from gandalf.inter.net.il (HELO gandalf.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 24 Jan 2006 21:12:15 +0000 Received: from nitzan.inter.net.il (nitzan.inter.net.il [192.114.186.20]) by gandalf.inter.net.il (MOS 3.7.1-GA) with ESMTP id HRD27013; Tue, 24 Jan 2006 22:47:39 +0200 (IST) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-80-230-153-138.inter.net.il [80.230.153.138]) by nitzan.inter.net.il (MOS 3.7.3-GA) with ESMTP id CNT82788 (AUTH halo1); Tue, 24 Jan 2006 22:47:32 +0200 (IST) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 21:21:00 -0000 Message-Id: From: Eli Zaretskii To: Vladimir Prus CC: gdb@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <200601241741.45231.ghost@cs.msu.su> (message from Vladimir Prus on Tue, 24 Jan 2006 17:41:44 +0300) Subject: Re: Multithreaded debugging: strange thread switches Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <200601231820.33372.ghost@cs.msu.su> <200601241722.48386.ghost@cs.msu.su> <20060124142846.GA15268@nevyn.them.org> <200601241741.45231.ghost@cs.msu.su> X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-01/txt/msg00245.txt.bz2 > From: Vladimir Prus > Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 17:41:44 +0300 > > > > Hmmm, maybe that's a sign that Changelog requirements are suboptimal? > > > Most often, Changelog entries contain lots of details about > > > changes to specific functions, but no general overview of the goal of the > > > patch. > > > > No, the mailing list archives are where this sort of thing is supposed > > to live > > But if I'm looking at Changelog entry, how can I guess the subject of email > that discusses this change? You can't. The way to look is to search for relevant keywords and for symbols from the sources in question. > > - and the comments in the code. > > But if change is across 10 files, a comment in one of them is not likely to > give the entire pictire. The entire picture should be either in one of the source files, the one that has the bulk of the related code, or in gdbint.texinfo. I know that in practice much of such info is just nowhere, but ChangeLog is no place for it, either. The way to make sure the big picture is not lost is to make a point of explaining it in one of the two places I mentioned when you submit a patch. I always ask people to add information to gdbint.texinfo, but of course much is still left unexplained.