From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29579 invoked by alias); 29 Feb 2004 14:57:50 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 29572 invoked from network); 29 Feb 2004 14:57:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (24.157.170.238) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 29 Feb 2004 14:57:49 -0000 Received: from gnu.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 309CC2B99; Sun, 29 Feb 2004 09:37:11 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <4041F917.5000308@gnu.org> Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 14:57:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.4.1) Gecko/20040217 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: kettenis@chello.nl, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix compilation of tui/tui.c References: <200402281503.i1SF3p8g011820@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> <4040B1D7.4090805@gnu.org> <200402281547.i1SFlv87012449@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> <4040C019.6090601@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-02/txt/msg00887.txt.bz2 >>Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 11:21:45 -0500 >>> From: Andrew Cagney >>> >> >>>> > Is there a reason for changing "" to <>, it breaks some of GDB's >>>> > scripts. >>>> > >>>> > I changed because we seem to use <> everywhere else in GDB for the >>>> > readline includes, e.g. event-top.c, completer.c. I think it's good >>>> > to be consistent; you get less surprises that way. >> >>> >>> I'll change them so that they are consistent. gdb_makefile.sh: >>> http://sources.redhat.com/gdb/current/ari/gdb_makefile.sh >>> knows about "..." includes. > > > Andrew, how about saying this somewhere in the coding standards > description? I, for one, was unaware of the special importance of > "...", and I presume Mark didn't know that as well. Once there's a branch I intend going two (?) better, change the build process so that we don't need to worry about dependencies any more (but yes that will involve documentation). Andrew