This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

[Fwd: Re: [rfa] `struct _bfd' -> `struct bfd']

From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at redhat dot com>
To: gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
Cc: amodra at bigpond dot net dot au
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 21:29:04 -0500
Subject: [Fwd: Re: [rfa] `struct _bfd' -> `struct bfd']

FYI,

I've approval to rename `struct _bfd' to `struct bfd'. I should get to it tomorrow. It will mean tinkering a number of GDB files.

Andrew

--- Begin Message ---

From: Alan Modra <amodra at bigpond dot net dot au>

To: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at redhat dot com>

Cc: binutils at sources dot redhat dot com

Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 12:48:48 +1030

Subject: Re: [rfa] `struct _bfd' -> `struct bfd'

References: <3E59C04D.3040304@redhat.com> <20030227011752.GZ31111@bubble.sa.bigpond.net.au> <3E5D747D.5000302@redhat.com>
On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 09:14:21PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> >On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 01:48:45AM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> >
> >>	(_bfd): Define for backward compatibility.
> >
> >
> >Do we really need this?  Seems like you can update gdb and sim in
> >tandem with the rest of your change.  Other users of bfd will just
> >need a small and fairly obvious change if they happen to use
> >struct _bfd, _and_ want to use a new libbfd.
> 
> Well, for a day or so.   It will make the switch easier.

OK, go ahead.  I'll delete it tomorrow. :-)

-- 
Alan Modra
IBM OzLabs - Linux Technology Centre
--- End Message ---

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]