Re: [PATCH] Remove gdb/nlm subdirectory

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>]

On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 08:24:54PM -0800, Jim Blandy wrote:
> In the past we've generally marked something as outgoing for a
> release, and then actually removed it in the next, or something
> roughly like that, to give people some warning in case someone wants
> to step up and maintain the code.  On the other hand, I think GDB's
> policies have accumulated a lot of dead weight over the last few
> years; some existing practices are more trouble than they're worth, in
> my opinion.
> 
> So I'm not sure it's deathly important to do a staged phase-out of the
> nlm directory.  But I'd like to see some other maintainers' opinions
> on it, so that we're making a deliberate choice as a group about how
> to handle these cases.

For things that folks still might, conceivably, be using in current
versions of GDB, and things that we still reasonably expect to work,
the obsoletion interval makes sense.  However, we've recently removed
one piece without that interval (rdi-share), and I've got my eye on two
others right now (KOD, which there was already agreement to remove;
just need to do it), and remote-rdp.c.  I think that's perfectly
appropriate.

I wouldn't mind pruning some of the other remote targets while we're
here, either - e.g. remote-mips.c.

I'm in favor of removing gdb/nlm/, but let's take another couple of
days to see if anyone disagrees.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery