Re: [rfc 3/5] record: make it build again

[Jan Kratochvil <jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com>]

Hi Markus,

On Mon, 11 Feb 2013 14:41:38 +0100, Metzger, Markus T wrote:
> Can I use my sourceware account also for Archer or do I need to request a new
> account for it?

Just try it to push some new branch there, I do not know which groups you
exist in.  I guess archer.git has r/w access permitted for the binutils+gdb
group.


> Is it OK to rebase an archer branch? I do this to incorporate review comments to
> maintain a reviewable patch series.

You can do anything you want in archer-markus-* (or choose your preferred name
instead of "markus") branches on archer.git.  It is good to write a note about
your existing new branch(es) to:
	http://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/ArcherBranchManagement


> I would still send patches, right? And they are still expected to apply on gdb's
> Master, right?

Yes, yes.  archer.git is just some additional space for convenience of the
communication, archer.git does not replace in any way existing GDB
contribution processes - those rely exclusively on the mailing list.


> The next patch I'm adding will rely on the btrace series plus the patches in this
> series. It will not apply without btrace below, anymore. That's quite a big series
> for adding a small patch. Would Archer help me, there?

With many pending patches it is no longer easy for mail readers to try the
patches, except for the dry (mail-only) review of the patches.

So it would be nice to also provide a branch with all the patches applied.


> How would I send patches so that people know what to review and at the
> same time allow them to apply the patch and try the changes?

I usually provide archer.git branch with everything applied together (one
could do better but I find it good enough that way).

The patches are sent normally, as you already do, each separately.

I do not find archer.git to be too magic, just do what you find convenient.


> I interpret your replies to the other patches in the series such that you
> approved http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-02/msg00217.html,
> http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-02/msg00216.html, and
> http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-02/msg00212.html. I added
> comments to the commit messages.

Yes, those are approved.

Just as one should not check-in patches which do not make sense on their own
it all should go in only together with the btrace patchset.

That is we should not change "target record" -> "target record-full" without
checking in also btrace.


FYI I have some draft <unavailable>-limitation unwinder for btrace here today,
to post it later.


Thanks,
Jan