From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27838 invoked by alias); 20 Sep 2002 15:51:50 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 27831 invoked from network); 20 Sep 2002 15:51:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO crack.them.org) (65.125.64.184) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 20 Sep 2002 15:51:50 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org ([66.93.61.169] ident=mail) by crack.them.org with asmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17sR0I-0000vg-00; Fri, 20 Sep 2002 11:51:42 -0500 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17sQ4G-0002q8-00; Fri, 20 Sep 2002 11:51:44 -0400 Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 08:51:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: David Carlton Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, Fernando Nasser Subject: Re: [rfa/testsuite] rename m-static1.cc to m-stat1.cc Message-ID: <20020920155144.GA10888@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: David Carlton , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, Fernando Nasser References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2002-09/txt/msg00522.txt.bz2 On Fri, Sep 20, 2002 at 08:46:54AM -0700, David Carlton wrote: > Andrew just pointed out to me that the presence of both m-static.cc > and m-static1.cc (in gdb.c++) violates the 8.3 rule. Is it okay if I > rename m-static1.cc to m-stat1.cc? (And make the corresponding > obvious change to m-static.exp, of course.) Or is there some other > name I should use? I'd rather you just add them to the list; it's in gdb/config/djgpp/fnchange.lst. Others may have a different opinion, though.. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer