From owner-svn-src-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 17 20:36:21 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3979106564A; Thu, 17 May 2012 20:36:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from bigwig.baldwin.cx (bigknife-pt.tunnel.tserv9.chi1.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f10:75::2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 977BD8FC19; Thu, 17 May 2012 20:36:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jhbbsd.localnet (unknown [209.249.190.124]) by bigwig.baldwin.cx (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 65BF2B91A; Thu, 17 May 2012 16:36:20 -0400 (EDT) From: John Baldwin To: src-committers@freebsd.org Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 16:36:01 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (FreeBSD/8.2-CBSD-20110714-p13; KDE/4.5.5; amd64; ; ) References: <201205172027.q4HKRO2x015677@svn.freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <201205172027.q4HKRO2x015677@svn.freebsd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201205171636.01383.jhb@freebsd.org> X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (bigwig.baldwin.cx); Thu, 17 May 2012 16:36:21 -0400 (EDT) Cc: svn-src-stable@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-stable-9@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r235564 - in stable/9/sys: amd64/include i386/conf kern X-BeenThere: svn-src-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for all the -stable branches of the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 20:36:21 -0000 On Thursday, May 17, 2012 4:27:24 pm John Baldwin wrote: > Author: jhb > Date: Thu May 17 20:27:24 2012 > New Revision: 235564 > URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/235564 > > Log: > MFC 235563: > Don't expose i386-only ptrace constants on amd64. This broke gdb with > libthread_db on amd64. I saw Andriy's bug report on IRC about gdb being broken about 15 minutes or so after merging the change that exposed this bug (r235559) to 9. I then had a choice of either reverting 235559 or instant MFC'ing the fix so that stable/9 would only be broken for an hour or so. Given how simple the fix was, I went with merging the fix rather than doing a revert. -- John Baldwin