This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: Discussing the next GDB release (GDB 7.0?)
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:
The follow links are for process record and replay submit second time:
The follow links are for process record and replay submit third time:
The follow links are for 'catch syscall' feature submit first time:
The follow links are for 'catch syscall' feature submit second time:
The follow links are for 'catch syscall' feature submit third time:
On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 11:39, Joel Brobecker <firstname.lastname@example.org> 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.