Re: [PATCH] Improve i386 prologue analyzer

[Andrew Cagney <cagney at gnu dot org>]

> > > Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 18:52:17 -0400
> > > From: Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>
> > >
> > > week 1.5: 6.2.1:
> > > Critical MIPS problem fixed.
> > > Fix for long-standing i386 bug known (needs 2 weeks testing)
> > >
> > > week 4.0: 6.2.2:
> > > Long standing bug on old i386 systems fixed.
> > >
> > > Does this seem reasonable.
>
>
> No.
>
> Sorry, you didn't answer my question, so I'll try to explain what bugs
> me: it's the logic behind these decisions that I cannot grasp.
>
> That is, if fixing MIPS is so important, then why did we release GDB
> 6.2 without waiting for the fix?  And if it wasn't important enough
> for 6.2 to wait for it, why can't it wait for a couple of weeks and be
> released in 6.2.1 together with the i386 prologue analyzer fix?

The MIPS breakage wasn't important enough to deny our mainline users a 
new release of GDB.  Especially when it fixed so many bugs, and 
especially when the delay could easily be a month..

However, now that we've got the MIPS patched up, I see no good reason 
for holding it back.

> I need to understand how to reconcile these two contradicting moves in
> order to judge whether I can live with the decision, whatever it is.

Andrew