From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3970 invoked by alias); 21 Dec 2011 12:24:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 3937 invoked by uid 22791); 21 Dec 2011 12:23:57 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,TW_DB 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, 21 Dec 2011 12:23:43 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E280E2BB17E; Wed, 21 Dec 2011 07:23:42 -0500 (EST) 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 pMLtVKvyQCJd; Wed, 21 Dec 2011 07:23:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 769EB2BB146; Wed, 21 Dec 2011 07:23:42 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 1C40D145615; Wed, 21 Dec 2011 04:23:30 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 12:53:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Sergio Durigan , Kai Tietz Subject: Re: [patch 1/2] Make gdbtui a shell script Message-ID: <20111221122330.GH23376@adacore.com> References: <20111221114641.GB25652@host2.jankratochvil.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20111221114641.GB25652@host2.jankratochvil.net> 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: 2011-12/txt/msg00719.txt.bz2 > it is discussed for years it is not great to have almost the same gdb and > gdbtui binaries, each ~5MB. Make gdbtui a shell script. > > I am not so sure how well is the shell script portable across Unices. > I assume MinGW is out of question anyway but that may not be a concern. How about not providing gdbtui at all, not even a shell script? Hmmm, maybe a little extreme? On the other hand, would it work if the script was called from a MinGW shell as well? I am pretty sure it'd work on cygwin platforms, and maybe it would be the same with MinGW shells? (I haven't looked at the patch yet). > Fedora has been using gdb<->gdbtui hardlink but according to Tom > argv[0] should not be used. GNU Coding Standards IMO do not say > exactly this thing. I remember reading the same as Tom, but that was a while ago. -- Joel