X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Cam-AntiVirus:	no malware found
X-Cam-SpamDetails:	not scanned
X-Cam-ScannerInfo:	http://www.cam.ac.uk/cs/email/scanner/
Message-ID:	<1324213329.2251.12.camel@localhost>
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] PCB sync request for the upcoming Ubuntu long term
	support release
From:	Peter Clifton <pcjc2 AT cam DOT ac DOT uk>
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Date:	Sun, 18 Dec 2011 13:02:09 +0000
In-Reply-To:	<20111216183708.GA30970@malakian.lan>
References:
	<CAHu0Z0WqAUZrADSxwywEzi6+KsA5+=hTfgWd7yJWYyxMYaWpHg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<20111216183708 DOT GA30970 AT malakian DOT lan>
X-Mailer:	Evolution 3.2.2-
Mime-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

--=-LyQ4+Vgj3lCY8CMXYdyY
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, 2011-12-16 at 10:37 -0800, Andrew Poelstra wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 05:28:18PM +0000, Justyn Butler wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> >=20
> > Given the large number of bug fixes etc since the last snapshot (and
> > because PCB is a non-essential package) I would expect that a sync
> > request for pcb from unstable would be accepted, if I've understood
> > the process correctly.
> > Does that sound sensible? If so shall I do it, or does someone else
> > better know what they're doing?
> >
>=20
> What needs to be done before we can do a fresh bugfix release
> of pcb? Is it just that somebody with permissions needs to take
> the time, or are there pending showstoppers that need dealing
> with?

I've fixed the snapping bugs DJ mentioned to me (which started to
irritate me when I was working on a layout last week!).

There is a bug I've encountered.. certainly in the PCB+GL branch, but
I'm not sure about git HEAD, where PCB will crash when using the "F"
short-cut (lookup connection).

So far, my valgrind and gdb foo have not been very helpful, as I've not
managed to indentify exact steps to reproduce the issue.

I saw it at least two or three times at work the other day though, so I
think the right strategy is to try and work under gdb or valgrind on
that particular design, and see if that sheds any light on the issue.

Best wishes,

Peter


--=-LyQ4+Vgj3lCY8CMXYdyY
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAABAgAGBQJO7eRRAAoJEOo4D/b1x+QV7skH/12L3S/k+vsZFD4AdKnUuXZQ
S7yn+GuDO28L8igOsJV87QGCrNly5Cnlk3jNcwx4WajgWlvAkZ0rii4omOuQm1AB
Jqa9PuSRxo/gqms5M3L1Nac+aMHa8yfIX5v+AXf91snGnjqRpZ+3DZt2F98A6qFt
/1MTBOuxnkd3keV+9NHse5FwUzDsVls6SarzdF0Gr8MUV/lMrj9ruquj+aYui+CR
ZKUpjTisSoJ22LOM2dlayx80zvGFUTBs/pAbrIUK/kA7necMKxSeX08Soy7Kjg+Z
fIVZpPEPUy9YOBIZfnmpn7aGWFAF7sROAL+SkNsLaKa9Q7OIiZ5Ujrm2sbxmWrk=
=1rsT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=-LyQ4+Vgj3lCY8CMXYdyY--

- Raw text -