Re: Backporting minor fix to older gdb releases

Luis Machado via Gdb <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.gdb.devel
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On 3/15/23 13:11, Joel Brobecker via Gdb wrote:
> FWIW, there is no real policy that I know of.
> 
> We have been known to accept patches on release branches past the .2
> release. It's been very rare, though. In all cases, the push was done
> with the understanding that there would likely not be another official
> release off that branch, so that was purely for the benefit of people
> who wanted to build from the HEAD of a release branch rather than from
> an official release.
> 
> Whether we should be doing it in this case, I don't have a strong
> opinion. I think Andrew is making good points, and I'm wondering
> whether it will actually serve anyone if we backport the patches.
> On the other hand, are the patches extra safe? If they are, perhaps
> in the spirit of not standing in the way of someone willing to make
> it better for others...
> 

All reasonable points, I agree.

The patch (a single one) is mostly trivial reordering of code to fix a pseudo-register
number that we get wrong for the pauth feature. It helps in that it allows people to use
gdb 9/10/11/12 with a new qemu. Otherwise those gdb's will just crash on connection, with no
way around it.
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.