From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28639 invoked by alias); 8 Apr 2013 18:54:59 -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 28630 invoked by uid 89); 8 Apr 2013 18:54:58 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-7.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,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; Mon, 08 Apr 2013 18:54:58 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r38IsvHO014561 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 14:54:57 -0400 Received: from barimba (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r38IstvC028841 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 8 Apr 2013 14:54:56 -0400 From: Tom Tromey To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: 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> Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2013 08:53:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20130408172841.GA28868@host2.jankratochvil.net> (Jan Kratochvil's message of "Mon, 8 Apr 2013 19:28:41 +0200") Message-ID: <87hajgua2o.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-SW-Source: 2013-04/txt/msg00203.txt.bz2 >>>>> "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?". 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. 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. Jan> Also I hope 755 should remain valid without a need for explicit Jan> chmod during make install. I thought INSTALL_PROGRAM handled this, but I see it doesn't. Weird. Anyway I would not worry about it. Maybe you need one at AC_CONFIG_FILES time, like: AC_CONFIG_FILES([gcore], [chmod +x gcore]) I'm not sure if this is strictly needed or not. Tom