From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20394 invoked by alias); 29 Jun 2011 17:58:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 20382 invoked by uid 22791); 29 Jun 2011 17:58:45 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 29 Jun 2011 17:58:21 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96CF22BB2AC; Wed, 29 Jun 2011 13:58:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id vuE2GDJ0rLUf; Wed, 29 Jun 2011 13:58:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AF372BB2A3; Wed, 29 Jun 2011 13:58:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id F118B145615; Wed, 29 Jun 2011 10:58:17 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 17:58:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Tom Tromey Cc: "H.J. Lu" , GDB Subject: Re: PATCH: PR testsuite/12040: GDB Fortran tests use g77 instead of gfortran Message-ID: <20110629175817.GE2407@adacore.com> References: <20100920135856.GA27953@intel.com> <20110629161001.GB2407@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2011-06/txt/msg00465.txt.bz2 > It is definitely in upstream dejagnu. > But, I added a new bit to this code that isn't (yet -- submitted > yesterday) upstream. So it must remain for a while yet. I am actually wondering now whether we might want to ever remove this code. It's pretty convenient when we discover dejagnu bugs and limitations... We could possibly treat the entire dejagnu library the way we treat readline? (thinking aloud) -- Joel