* RFA: move *-stub.c to stubs/
@ 2012-03-05 16:04 Tristan Gingold
2012-03-05 17:16 ` Pedro Alves
2012-03-12 22:30 ` Stan Shebs
0 siblings, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Tristan Gingold @ 2012-03-05 16:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org ml
Hi,
now that a stubs/ subdirectory has been created, I propose to move existing stub files to it.
No diff created, no regression tests executed.
Should I simply cvs remove/cvs add ? We will loose the cvs log, but for i386-stub.c (the only one I checked), it is not very long.
Tristan.
gdb/
2012-03-05 Tristan Gingold <gingold@adacore.com>
* sparc-stub.c: Move to stubs/
* sh-stub.c: Likewise.
* m68k-stub.c: Likewise.
* m32r-stub.c: Likewise.
* i386-stub.c: Likewise.
gdb/stubs/
2012-03-05 Tristan Gingold <gingold@adacore.com>
* sparc-stub.c: Move from ..
* sh-stub.c: Likewise.
* m68k-stub.c: Likewise.
* m32r-stub.c: Likewise.
* i386-stub.c: Likewise.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: RFA: move *-stub.c to stubs/
2012-03-05 16:04 RFA: move *-stub.c to stubs/ Tristan Gingold
@ 2012-03-05 17:16 ` Pedro Alves
2012-03-05 17:22 ` Joel Brobecker
2012-03-12 22:30 ` Stan Shebs
1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Pedro Alves @ 2012-03-05 17:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tristan Gingold; +Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org ml
On 03/05/2012 04:04 PM, Tristan Gingold wrote:
> now that a stubs/ subdirectory has been created, I propose to move existing stub files to it.
>
> No diff created, no regression tests executed.
>
> Should I simply cvs remove/cvs add ? We will loose the cvs log, but for i386-stub.c (the only one I checked), it is not very long.
I think git log will understand the rename anyway, so that's fine with me.
I can't speak for others, but my only use of cvs log nowadays is through the
cvs web frontend.
--
Pedro Alves
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: RFA: move *-stub.c to stubs/
2012-03-05 17:16 ` Pedro Alves
@ 2012-03-05 17:22 ` Joel Brobecker
2012-03-08 14:44 ` Tristan Gingold
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Joel Brobecker @ 2012-03-05 17:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pedro Alves; +Cc: Tristan Gingold, gdb-patches@sourceware.org ml
> > Should I simply cvs remove/cvs add ? We will loose the cvs log, but for i386-stub.c (the only one I checked), it is not very long.
>
>
> I think git log will understand the rename anyway, so that's fine with me.
> I can't speak for others, but my only use of cvs log nowadays is through the
> cvs web frontend.
I prefer this approach as well, as I'd rather we avoid repository
surgery just for these relatively minor files...
--
Joel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: RFA: move *-stub.c to stubs/
2012-03-05 17:22 ` Joel Brobecker
@ 2012-03-08 14:44 ` Tristan Gingold
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Tristan Gingold @ 2012-03-08 14:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joel Brobecker, Pedro Alves; +Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org ml
On Mar 5, 2012, at 6:22 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote:
>>> Should I simply cvs remove/cvs add ? We will loose the cvs log, but for i386-stub.c (the only one I checked), it is not very long.
>>
>>
>> I think git log will understand the rename anyway, so that's fine with me.
>> I can't speak for others, but my only use of cvs log nowadays is through the
>> cvs web frontend.
>
> I prefer this approach as well, as I'd rather we avoid repository
> surgery just for these relatively minor files…
Ok, now committed.
Tristan.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: RFA: move *-stub.c to stubs/
2012-03-05 16:04 RFA: move *-stub.c to stubs/ Tristan Gingold
2012-03-05 17:16 ` Pedro Alves
@ 2012-03-12 22:30 ` Stan Shebs
2012-03-12 23:04 ` Joel Brobecker
1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Stan Shebs @ 2012-03-12 22:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-patches
On 3/5/12 8:04 AM, Tristan Gingold wrote:
> Hi,
>
> now that a stubs/ subdirectory has been created, I propose to move existing stub files to it.
>
Just now noticing this - do we really want a separate ChangeLog in the
subdir? The last time it came up, people seemed to want fewer
ChangeLogs, not more.
Stan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: RFA: move *-stub.c to stubs/
2012-03-12 22:30 ` Stan Shebs
@ 2012-03-12 23:04 ` Joel Brobecker
2012-03-12 23:15 ` Pedro Alves
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Joel Brobecker @ 2012-03-12 23:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stan Shebs; +Cc: gdb-patches
> Just now noticing this - do we really want a separate ChangeLog in
> the subdir? The last time it came up, people seemed to want fewer
> ChangeLogs, not more.
That's a good point. Any objection to fixing this?
--
Joel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: RFA: move *-stub.c to stubs/
2012-03-12 23:04 ` Joel Brobecker
@ 2012-03-12 23:15 ` Pedro Alves
2012-03-13 0:35 ` Joel Brobecker
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Pedro Alves @ 2012-03-12 23:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joel Brobecker; +Cc: Stan Shebs, gdb-patches
On 03/12/2012 11:04 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote:
>> Just now noticing this - do we really want a separate ChangeLog in
>> the subdir? The last time it came up, people seemed to want fewer
>> ChangeLogs, not more.
>
> That's a good point. Any objection to fixing this?
That came in in the context of docs and tests. But in this case, does it really make sense
to have essentially separate programs' logs in gdb's ChangeLog? IMO, it doesn't. IMO, it kind
of follows exactly from putting the files in their own dir. They're separate things, not part
of GDB.
--
Pedro Alves
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: RFA: move *-stub.c to stubs/
2012-03-12 23:15 ` Pedro Alves
@ 2012-03-13 0:35 ` Joel Brobecker
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Joel Brobecker @ 2012-03-13 0:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pedro Alves; +Cc: Stan Shebs, gdb-patches
> That came in in the context of docs and tests. But in this case, does
> it really make sense to have essentially separate programs' logs in
> gdb's ChangeLog? IMO, it doesn't. IMO, it kind of follows exactly
> from putting the files in their own dir. They're separate things, not
> part of GDB.
Hmm, valid points too. I agree it's better to keep the extra CL, now.
--
Joel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2012-03-13 0:35 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2012-03-05 16:04 RFA: move *-stub.c to stubs/ Tristan Gingold
2012-03-05 17:16 ` Pedro Alves
2012-03-05 17:22 ` Joel Brobecker
2012-03-08 14:44 ` Tristan Gingold
2012-03-12 22:30 ` Stan Shebs
2012-03-12 23:04 ` Joel Brobecker
2012-03-12 23:15 ` Pedro Alves
2012-03-13 0:35 ` Joel Brobecker
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox