Hello, 2011/7/6 Przemysław Pawełczyk <[email protected]>:
> I think it cannot be closed without fixing it in squeeze, because > that's the point of debian stable (and I presumably wouldn't lost my > time back then for squeeze greatness knowing I will be asked such > question). This bug makes use of async commands (and thus interactive > debuggers build on top of them) impossible, so I think it is quite > important. > > Is it possible to close a bug for wheezy+ and leave it opened for squeeze? We at least can tag the bugs. > I can agree that gdb/mi is possibly not the most used stuff in gdb, > but it's still there and is broken, which is pretty bad. If fixing > broken feature isn't a good reason for update worth of the next point > release, then I'm not sure what is. Usually point releases are mainly security fixes and important fixes. In anycase, I'll try to get the fix in for next point release, or at least on squeeze proposed updates. I might ping you for testing. > gdb deserves to be in backports independently of your decision about > this bug. Surely gdb users (most of them?) are capable of building > their tool, but it is time consuming, so having prepackaged more > recent version in repositories would be really nice and gladly > welcomed. I have recently started to upload later development snapshot to experimental. Later stable upstream release 7.2 is on wheezy/unstable and I was planning at least do one or more Debian uploads, I'll consider to backport it to squeeze as well. > I hope you'll make a good decision in both topics. I hope my decision suits your needs. :-) Best regards, -- Héctor Orón -.. . -... .. .- -. -.. . ...- . .-.. --- .--. . .-. <free spam> -- Would you like to make a donation for Debian Conference? ** http://debconf11.debconf.org/payments.xhtml ** </free spam> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
