Re: gdb archeology

[Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at cygnus dot com>]

Stan Shebs wrote:
> 
> Daniel Berlin wrote:
> >
> > Oooh, ooh, i'll do it.
> > That way, you can say (if some disgruntled person asks) "I dunno, some
> > stupid college kid deleted them".
> > Works great.
> > --Dan
> 
> Then the grumble gets posted to Slashdot, then from there to MSNBC,
> where it's reported as "college kids ruin Linux", and my Red Hat
> shares go down again. :-( :-)
> 
> Actually, there is a procedure to declare sources obsolete, basically
> a two-stage process of marking them as dead, then deleting in the
> next release - just in case it's not as dead as we thought...  I
> know I wrote the procedure down somewhere, but I don't see it anywhere
> in the sources - perhaps I just described in a posting.  Anyway,
> you can look at the gould or tahoe sources to see what happens.

It is in the NEWS file:

``
*** Changes in GDB-4.18:
[....]
* OBSOLETE configurations
Gould PowerNode, NP1                            np1-*-*, pn-*-*
Configurations that have been declared obsolete will be commented out,
but the code will be left in place.  If there is no activity to revive
these configurations before the next release of GDB, the sources will
be permanently REMOVED.
''

I'm looking for someone to delete this code (I've interpreted the above
to mean that the code can be deleted once a follow-on release has been
made).

	Andrew