From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23365 invoked by alias); 26 Mar 2004 23:42:57 -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 23358 invoked from network); 26 Mar 2004 23:42:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO takamaka.act-europe.fr) (142.179.108.108) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 26 Mar 2004 23:42:56 -0000 Received: by takamaka.act-europe.fr (Postfix, from userid 507) id 31E7C47D62; Fri, 26 Mar 2004 15:42:55 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 23:42:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC/RFA] (testsuite/Ada) Add gdb_compile_ada Message-ID: <20040326234255.GM1483@gnat.com> References: <20040224195615.GC542@gnat.com> <20040224230812.GE542@gnat.com> <20040225183211.GH1105@gnat.com> <20040225201749.GA21911@nevyn.them.org> <20040226223742.GH1154@gnat.com> <20040226230239.GA8487@nevyn.them.org> <20040303042107.GB1146@gnat.com> <20040305041814.GI5320@nevyn.them.org> <20040305060322.GD1226@gnat.com> <20040305164815.GB23778@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040305164815.GB23778@nevyn.them.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-SW-Source: 2004-03/txt/msg00689.txt.bz2 Hello Daniel, I am finally taking the time to come back to this discussion. Sorry about the long delay, I imagine that things have become a bit foggy for you. I re-read the entire thread, and I think I can say this: - you said that the changes to dejagnu itself looked reasonable to you. So I'll submit them to the dejagnu maintainers. - There was only one remaining issue with the "begin" command (Ada-only for now, but might become available in all languages sometime in the future - I will take care of that). I will start a new thread with a summary of what has been said and try to answer your questions. - The first Ada test looked sane :-). So I suggest we work on adding a first version of the test without the currently-under-discussion gdb_begin function. Cheers, -- Joel