Re: GDB 5.3.1 vs 5.4/6.0

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>]

On Thu, Jan 02, 2003 at 03:32:48PM +0000, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> First, don't forget that the 5.3 branch is open.  Config and other fixes
> can be committed.
> 
> Still, the question is: should the next release be 5.3.1, or 5.4/6.0?
> 
> 5.3.1 would be something like end Jan / start Feb.
> 5.4/6.0 branch would be ~March.
> 
> (As for 5.4 vs 6.0, I don't think the multi-arch goal will have been
> achieved.)

I recommend the way I've been doing binutils releases: leave the branch
open for a little, and if people find things that they want fixed in a
new release and handle getting them onto the branch, then do a 5.3.1
release.  Don't soak massive development time into it.  I have one
issue that I would probably want fixed in a 5.3.1, which is that
putting "call" in a breakpoints command list _still_ segfaults;
there're two patches for this still awaiting review.

One issue by itself isn't really enough to bother, though.

Re multiarch: HP/PA is progressing and I can help on that if needed; I
can even do the m32r if there is a perception that we still need it (is
there?) since there conveniently are GCC, sim, and binutils ports to
this target.  z8k has binutils and sim but no GCC port as far as I can
see; I could do it blindly, though, I wager - it's an impressively
minimal GDB port.  So if we want to hold out for multi-arch I bet we
could do it.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer