This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
RE: Building gdb from source
- From: "Dave Korn" <dave dot korn at artimi dot com>
- To: "'Daniel Jacobowitz'" <drow at false dot org>
- Cc: "'Bruce Dubbs'" <bdubbs at linuxfromscratch dot org>, <gdb at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 16:57:57 +0100
- Subject: RE: Building gdb from source
On 07 April 2006 16:49, 'Daniel Jacobowitz' wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 04:39:42PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
>> On 07 April 2006 16:33, 'Daniel Jacobowitz' wrote:
>>> On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 04:25:55PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
>>>> ? Is this because releases could be coming from branches that were
>>>> branched at very different times? Would it have been more reasonable if
>>>> I had said "releases that are based on roughly-contemporary branches"?
>>> But there are no such releases.
>> Ok, I give up, I haven't got the faintest idea what you're talking
>> about. I can't even parse that.
> Binutils and GDB releases are branched at unpredictably different
> times. How close in time they are doesn't matter if there's been an
> interface change in between.
Ah, ok, we're basically in agreement. I understand that interface changes
are the one thing that can break compatibility. I was simply inferring that
if the interval between a binutils branch and a gdb branch is smaller rather
than larger, the odds of someone having made such a change are smaller rather
than greater, even though that change is technically a delta that could take
place in an instant.
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....