Re: [PATCH 2/2] Add gdb_libdir/python-<version> in front of Python search path.

[Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>]

On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:28:05PM +0200, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> On Thu, 20 May 2010 20:40:03 +0200, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> > +\n\
> > +# Put gdb_libdir/python-<version> in the python search path.  This allows\n\
> > +# us to provide GDB bundled with its own python runtime (the .py/pyc files).\n\
> > +sys.path.insert(0, gdb.libdir + \"/python-%d.%d\" % (sys.version_info[0],\n\
> > +                                                     sys.version_info[1]))\n\
> 
> While I do not mind wrt FSF GDB I find this kind of patch as the schoolbook
> example of a distro patch nobody expects to be accepted upstream.

I have to disagree about that ("textbook example" is a little harsh, no?)
- I wouldn't have proposed this idea if I didn't think that it wouldn't
be useful to others. I guess we have to take one step back and decide
whether we want to help users who build binaries like AdaCore does, or
not.  I don't think that this is the first time that someone introduces
a patch that helps in that direction, and I don't think we're doing
a disservice to GDB to adding it either. It's not like it's a complicated
and intrusive change...

I'm going to hold off on that for a day or two, see what everyone
thinks. If it has to be kept inside AdaCore, then so be it.  But it's
clear, just with Dan's answer, that someone else would benefit from
the code. And code sharing means more time to work on other stuff.

> I could push the same way patch for using gcc44 for specific testcases
> requiring newer gcc, workaround of Red Hat specific kernel incompatibility or
> workaround of upstream ccache bug which you voted for not including in FSF GDB
> 	http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-03/msg00026.html

We can revisit the decision. I don't remember the details, but I feel that
the situation was not the same then.

-- 
Joel