From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20042 invoked by alias); 24 Mar 2006 23:08:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 20033 invoked by uid 22791); 24 Mar 2006 23:08:30 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from sibelius.xs4all.nl (HELO sibelius.xs4all.nl) (82.92.89.47) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 24 Mar 2006 23:08:30 +0000 Received: from elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (root@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl [192.168.0.2]) by sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k2ON4i6G024264; Sat, 25 Mar 2006 00:04:45 +0100 (CET) Received: from elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (kettenis@localhost.sibelius.xs4all.nl [127.0.0.1]) by elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.4/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k2ON4iPZ027395; Sat, 25 Mar 2006 00:04:44 +0100 (CET) Received: (from kettenis@localhost) by elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id k2ON4iW5014084; Sat, 25 Mar 2006 00:04:44 +0100 (CET) Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2006 00:04:00 -0000 Message-Id: <200603242304.k2ON4iW5014084@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> From: Mark Kettenis To: drow@false.org CC: eliz@gnu.org, jimb@red-bean.com, sje@cup.hp.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-reply-to: <20060324144727.GA15703@nevyn.them.org> (message from Daniel Jacobowitz on Fri, 24 Mar 2006 09:47:27 -0500) Subject: Re: [PATCH] Remove gdb/nlm subdirectory References: <200603240102.RAA18110@hpsje.cup.hp.com> <8f2776cb0603232024u163c75edm20eb01ff1d476d18@mail.gmail.com> <20060324043008.GA5092@nevyn.them.org> <20060324144727.GA15703@nevyn.them.org> Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-03/txt/msg00281.txt.bz2 > Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 09:47:27 -0500 > From: Daniel Jacobowitz > > On Fri, Mar 24, 2006 at 11:46:20AM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 23:30:08 -0500 > > > From: Daniel Jacobowitz > > > Cc: sje@cup.hp.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org > > > > > > 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. > > > > Do we have good reasons to believe the nlm stuff is not used, or > > cannot be built with a reasonable amount of effort? If so, I see no > > reason to have the staging period. > > Well, in all the time I've been working on GDB, I've never seen a user > question about Netware, a GNATS PR about Netware, or a developer commit > tested on Netware. To build it you need a Netware-provided SDK; I > don't know if those are still obtainable. I believe the last time we proposed this some guy from Novell stepped up and said he'd like to keep the code. This must have been around the time Novell acquired SuSE. But I never heard from this guy again. > > Otherwise, let's leave this for the next release. > > I'm fine with that if you'd prefer. I think we can ignore its old > configure file for now, then, instead of worrying about upgrading it to > 2.5x (which started this discussion). We have no way of checking whether this code still works. Let's get rid of it. If someone complains, he/she can get it out of the attic and we can add it back if said person converts the configure fragment to autoconf 2.5x. Mark