From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30525 invoked by alias); 29 Sep 2004 08:39:16 -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 30500 invoked from network); 29 Sep 2004 08:39:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nile.gnat.com) (205.232.38.5) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 29 Sep 2004 08:39:13 -0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nile.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E282F2D1A; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 04:39:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from nile.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (nile.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 17711-01-5; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 04:39:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: by nile.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1345) id 2DCEDF2D1B; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 04:39:13 -0400 (EDT) From: Paul Hilfinger To: cagney@gnu.org Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <4159A662.2090407@gnu.org> (message from Andrew Cagney on Tue, 28 Sep 2004 13:58:58 -0400) Subject: Re: [RFA]: Turn on initial Ada support in GDB References: <20040927103327.450A8F2C33@nile.gnat.com> <4159A662.2090407@gnu.org> Message-Id: <20040929083913.2DCEDF2D1B@nile.gnat.com> Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 08:39:00 -0000 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at nile.gnat.com X-SW-Source: 2004-09/txt/msg00469.txt.bz2 > > * Makefile.in (ada_lex_c): Define > > (HFILES_NO_SRCDIR): Add ada-lang.h. > > Can these two lines be put on hold for a moment, there's a symtab change > that should be run past the symtab reviewer. > > > (COMMON_OBS): Add ada-lang.o, ada-typeprint.o, ada-valprint.o. > > (YYOBJ): Add ada-exp.o. > > otherwize all the Makefile stuff can go in. > > > (rule .l.c): Generalize to not mention ada. > > (ada-lex.o): Remove (ada-lex.c is included by ada-exp.y). > > ... dig dig, ah, bleaugh :-) Leave this for the moment -> I'll tweak > gdb_makefile.sh to better handle this. Just wonder if the above should > be changed from .l.c to .l.h. (but which ever)? As for .h vs. .c here: I dunno. I've always thought of .h as meaning "header" rather than "included". Besides, if we think of .l.c as a general 'lex' rule, lex-generated files can just as easily be standalone as not. So this is all approved save the HFILES_NO_SRCDIR thing? I see you put in ada_lex_c already. > > * gdbtypes.h (TYPE_FLAG_FIXED_INSTANCE): Define. > > It isn't used. It's used in several places in ada-lang.c (but not in this patch; it's already in ada-lang.c, and this patch is needed to make it work). > > doc ChangeLog: > > > > 2004-09-22 Paul N. Hilfinger > > > > * gdb.texinfo (Filenames): Add Ada suffixes. > > (Ada) New section. > > For Eli, suggest posting it separatly. I see that Eli already responded, and I will make the requested changes before committing. OK. So where does this leave us? Does all of this amount to a "go"? Paul