[PATCH] gdb, gdbserver: update copyright years in copyright notices

[PATCH] gdb, gdbserver: update copyright years in copyright notices

[Simon Marchi]

The copyright notices printed by these programs still use year 2024.
Update to 2025.

It seems like a trivial patch to me, but I am posting it for review, in
case there's something wrong in the new-year process that caused them to
be missed, in which case we should address that too.

Change-Id: I7d9541bb154b8000e66cfead4e4228e33c49f18b
---
 gdb/top.c              | 2 +-
 gdbserver/gdbreplay.cc | 2 +-
 gdbserver/server.cc    | 2 +-
 3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/gdb/top.c b/gdb/top.c
index 72d19530070e..f934c7038559 100644
--- a/gdb/top.c
+++ b/gdb/top.c
@@ -1311,7 +1311,7 @@ print_gdb_version (struct ui_file *stream, bool interactive)
   /* Second line is a copyright notice.  */
 
   gdb_printf (stream,
-	      "Copyright (C) 2024 Free Software Foundation, Inc.\n");
+	      "Copyright (C) 2025 Free Software Foundation, Inc.\n");
 
   /* Following the copyright is a brief statement that the program is
      free software, that users are free to copy and change it on
diff --git a/gdbserver/gdbreplay.cc b/gdbserver/gdbreplay.cc
index 44aa2fb52cef..a5170317156b 100644
--- a/gdbserver/gdbreplay.cc
+++ b/gdbserver/gdbreplay.cc
@@ -462,7 +462,7 @@ static void
 gdbreplay_version (void)
 {
   printf ("GNU gdbreplay %s%s\n"
-	  "Copyright (C) 2024 Free Software Foundation, Inc.\n"
+	  "Copyright (C) 2025 Free Software Foundation, Inc.\n"
 	  "gdbreplay is free software, covered by "
 	  "the GNU General Public License.\n"
 	  "This gdbreplay was configured as \"%s\"\n",
diff --git a/gdbserver/server.cc b/gdbserver/server.cc
index ce84c7f75d98..17fe1ab19431 100644
--- a/gdbserver/server.cc
+++ b/gdbserver/server.cc
@@ -3808,7 +3808,7 @@ static void
 gdbserver_version (void)
 {
   printf ("GNU gdbserver %s%s\n"
-	  "Copyright (C) 2024 Free Software Foundation, Inc.\n"
+	  "Copyright (C) 2025 Free Software Foundation, Inc.\n"
 	  "gdbserver is free software, covered by the "
 	  "GNU General Public License.\n"
 	  "This gdbserver was configured as \"%s\"\n",

base-commit: 9cdccc47441e64b8e67a99b0fff8a6bf5f9a72a0
-- 
2.50.1

Re: [PATCH] gdb, gdbserver: update copyright years in copyright notices

[Kevin Buettner]

On Fri, 25 Jul 2025 12:31:44 -0400
Simon Marchi <simon.marchi@efficios.com> wrote:

> The copyright notices printed by these programs still use year 2024.
> Update to 2025.
> 
> It seems like a trivial patch to me, but I am posting it for review, in
> case there's something wrong in the new-year process that caused them to
> be missed, in which case we should address that too.

The patch is fine, but I can't answer why these might have been missed
by the new-year process.

Approved-by: Kevin Buettner <kevinb@redhat.com>

Re: [PATCH] gdb, gdbserver: update copyright years in copyright notices

[Tom Tromey]

>>>>> "Simon" == Simon Marchi <simon.marchi@efficios.com> writes:

Simon> The copyright notices printed by these programs still use year 2024.
Simon> Update to 2025.

Simon> It seems like a trivial patch to me, but I am posting it for review, in
Simon> case there's something wrong in the new-year process that caused them to
Simon> be missed, in which case we should address that too.

I just ran the script, I didn't realize there was a documented
procedure.

I wonder if the script could instead be changed to do this, so the
procedure could literally be to run the script.

Tom

Re: [PATCH] gdb, gdbserver: update copyright years in copyright notices

[Simon Marchi]

On 7/30/25 3:38 PM, Tom Tromey wrote:
>>>>>> "Simon" == Simon Marchi <simon.marchi@efficios.com> writes:
> 
> Simon> The copyright notices printed by these programs still use year 2024.
> Simon> Update to 2025.
> 
> Simon> It seems like a trivial patch to me, but I am posting it for review, in
> Simon> case there's something wrong in the new-year process that caused them to
> Simon> be missed, in which case we should address that too.
> 
> I just ran the script, I didn't realize there was a documented
> procedure.
> 
> I wonder if the script could instead be changed to do this, so the
> procedure could literally be to run the script.

I pushed my patch, plus another that fixed the copyright years in some
testsuite files, that were likely posted in 2024 but merged in 2025.

I will look at the script to see if it can handle the cases of years
printed by the program.

Simon