Re: [PATCH 7/9] Rewrite lookup_static_symbol to use gdbarch routine

[Doug Evans <xdje42 at gmail dot com>]

On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 1:53 PM, Doug Evans <xdje42@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 7:22 PM, Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com> wrote:
>> Hi Doug,
>>
>>> To keep things moving along I added the copyright headers.
>>
>> Thanks for doing that.
>>
>>> However, I think we could be a bit more lax when it comes to
>>> such trivial testcases.
>>
>> The FSF allows us to be lax for trivial files (with 10 lines being
>> one explicit limit on triviality).  But:
>>
>> The problem with being lax is that it creates a little extra work
>> for us at the start of each year, when we update the copyright headers.
>> The FSF has been asking us to look into copyright headers in the past,
>> and it was a lot of work, so I've added a bit of simple-minded code
>> to the script that updates the copyright headers in GDB to also issue
>> a warning if a copyright header hasn't been found. That way, we can
>> then investigate the few problematic files each year rather than
>> a massive number when the FSF notices something.
>>
>> That's why I always appreciate the copyright headers being added
>> right from the start.
>>
>> So, again, thanks a lot for adding those! :)
>
> No worries.
> A few more words added to the wiki to added the needed context and
> clarity would be great.
> I'll do that.

Hmmm, I see that in gdb the convention is "Copyright (C)" whereas in
the gdb/testsuite the convention is "Copyright" with no "(C)".
Some tests have "(C)" but the vast majority don't.
Both are allowed, and I'm not planning on going through and changing anything.
Just thought I'd point it out.