Re: [rfa/doco] PROBLEMS: add regressions since gdb 6.0

[mec dot gnu at mindspring dot com (Michael Elizabeth Chastain)]

Yes, I too wish there was a list of PR's fixed.

I don't think it's all that helpful to the users.  As a user of *gcc*,
I look at their list of PR's fixed, and I say "yeah okay cool", and
then I run my own before+after spin anyways.  But as a tester of gdb,
I enjoy looking at my "compare by gdb" tables and seeing all the
FAIL->PASS transititions.

> Of course, it helps that GCC has several people who try to make sure
> that their bug database is as up to date as possible and organized in
> such a way as to make it easy to figure out this information.

Our bug database has several deficiencies.  It's hard to make
attachments (bugzilla is much easier).  We ask for fields that are
not important, like "severity", and do not ask for information that
is critical, like "what compiler are you using".  We need a page that
says "here is the Unix 'script' command, please attach a typescript
with your bug report".  And then there's all that nifty milestone
stuff.

> Whereas you're the only person seriously looking at the GDB bug database,
> and you're also focused (perhaps more focused) on regression testing.

Mark K and Andrew C and Daniel J and David C spend a lot of time
in there too.

Michael C