This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: gdb.c++ vs dos names
- From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>
- To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain <mec at shout dot net>
- Cc: ac131313 at redhat dot com, carlton at math dot stanford dot edu,gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 13:23:23 -0500
- Subject: Re: gdb.c++ vs dos names
- References: <200301091752.h09HqDL03494@duracef.shout.net>
On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 11:52:13AM -0600, Michael Elizabeth Chastain wrote:
> Michael C lies:
> > Well, the snapshot tarball has testsuite/gdb.*/Makefile files in it,
> > thus there are 8.3 conflicts in every testsuite directory.
>
> Whoops, that is a lie, I was sloppy. David C has a very good point
> about gdb.hp/gdb.stabs.
>
> In the snapshot tarball gdb/testsuite has these subdirectories:
>
> gdb.arch gdb.asm gdb.base gdb.c++ gdb.disasm gdb.hp gdb.java gdb.mi
> gdb.stabs gdb.threads gdb.trace
>
> These subdirectories have 'Makefile' files:
>
> gdb.arch gdb.asm gdb.base gdb.c++ gdb.disasm gdb.java gdb.mi gdb.threads
> gdb.trace
>
> The difference is gdb.hp and gdb.stabs. configure.in handles these
> as conditionally set 'configdirs'. All the other testsuite/gdb.*/Makefile
> files are produced by an AC_OUTPUT line.
Once spotted, easily corrected. Thanks for all the digging. A couple
of other things in here need to be fixed up to; give me a couple of
minutes.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer