From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21559 invoked by alias); 9 Apr 2013 14:26:10 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 21549 invoked by uid 89); 9 Apr 2013 14:26:10 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-8.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Tue, 09 Apr 2013 14:26:09 +0000 Received: from int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.25]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r39EQ8UI031426 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2013 10:26:08 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r39EQ65O013261; Tue, 9 Apr 2013 10:26:07 -0400 Message-ID: <516424FE.4050307@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2013 15:29:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130311 Thunderbird/17.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Tromey CC: Jan Kratochvil , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch 2/2+rfc+doc] Install gcore by default (+new man page) References: <20130407185443.GB15389@host2.jankratochvil.net> <83r4ilawlx.fsf@gnu.org> <20130408172841.GA28868@host2.jankratochvil.net> <87hajgua2o.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <87hajgua2o.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2013-04/txt/msg00224.txt.bz2 On 04/08/2013 07:54 PM, Tom Tromey wrote: >>>>>> "Jan" == Jan Kratochvil writes: > > Jan> Leaving it pending for RFC if gcore should be installed at all > > I think it should be, because it is useful and "why not?". A couple points to consider: - Should we install it on hosts/builds that don't support gcore with the native target? - Should we install it on mingw hosts (where there'll be no shell capable of running the script available)? > > Jan> and also if > Jan> current > Jan> src/gdb/gcore.in + src/gdb/gcore > Jan> should not be called for example like before > Jan> src/gdb/gdb_gcore.sh.in + src/gdb/gdb_gcore.sh > > I like your new naming. Me too. > > Jan> -completion) or if it should not be called with .sh as > Jan> src/gdb/gcore.sh.in + src/gdb/gcore.sh > Jan> although I do not see a reason for it, there are some *.sh files but those are > Jan> not installed. > > I think having ".sh" on an installed script is a mistake. > For one thing, if you change the implementation of the command then you > get confusion -- either the ".sh" is actively wrong, or you have to change > the name. Definitely agreed. -- Pedro Alves