[rfc] Move Makefile.in:VERSION to VERSION file

Andrew Cagney
2001-03-18T14:18:00Z

Hello,

Per discussion on the gdb@ list, this patch moves GDB's version number
out of Makefile.in and into a separate file called (of all things :-)
VERSION.

The intention is that this patch will be followed by two further
changes:

o a cronjob to update the date in
the VERSION file.

o Replace 5.0 with a date

thoughts?

Andrew
2001-03-17 Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com>

* Makefile.in (VERSION): Delete. Moved to file VERSION.
(version.c): Depends on file VERSION. Extract version number from
VERSION file.
* VERSION: New file.

*** GDB/src/gdb/Makefile.in Mon Mar 12 11:01:13 2001
--- WIP/src/gdb/Makefile.in Sat Mar 17 14:54:35 2001
***************
*** 357,363 ****
ADD_FILES = $(REGEX) $(XM_ADD_FILES) $(TM_ADD_FILES) $(NAT_ADD_FILES)
ADD_DEPS = $(REGEX) $(XM_ADD_FILES) $(TM_ADD_FILES) $(NAT_ADD_FILES)

- VERSION = 5.0
DIST=gdb

LINT=/usr/5bin/lint
--- 357,362 ----
***************
*** 1009,1018 ****
< $(srcdir)/COPYING > $(srcdir)/copying.tmp
mv $(srcdir)/copying.tmp $(srcdir)/copying.c

! version.c: Makefile
rm -f version.c
echo '#include "version.h"' >> version.c
! echo 'const char version[] = "$(VERSION)";' >> version.c
echo 'const char host_name[] = "$(host_alias)";' >> version.c
echo 'const char target_name[] = "$(target_alias)";' >> version.c
version.o: version.c $(version_h)
--- 1008,1017 ----
< $(srcdir)/COPYING > $(srcdir)/copying.tmp
mv $(srcdir)/copying.tmp $(srcdir)/copying.c

! version.c: Makefile VERSION
rm -f version.c
echo '#include "version.h"' >> version.c
! echo 'const char version[] = "'"`head -1 ${srcdir}/VERSION`"'";' >> version.c
echo 'const char host_name[] = "$(host_alias)";' >> version.c
echo 'const char target_name[] = "$(target_alias)";' >> version.c
version.o: version.c $(version_h)
*** GDB/src/gdb/VERSION Wed Dec 31 19:00:00 1969
--- WIP/src/gdb/VERSION Sat Mar 17 14:26:39 2001
***************
*** 0 ****
--- 1 ----
+ 5.0
From ac131313@cygnus.com Sun Mar 18 14:18:00 2001
From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>
To: Pierre Muller <muller@cerbere.u-strasbg.fr>, GDB Patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.cygnus.com>
Subject: Re: [rfa/pascal!] Gag -Werror shift warning and bug
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 14:18:00 -0000
Message-id: <3AB3CF5C.933413E1@cygnus.com>
References: <4.2.0.58.20010305095243.00c45b00@ics.u-strasbg.fr>
X-SW-Source: 2001-03/msg00338.html
Content-length: 1326

Pierre Muller wrote:
>
> After looking at the c-exp.y equivalent code, I suggest that you simply
> take that code,
> as it doesn't seem to suffer from the same problems

Good point. I'll check in the attatched.

thanks, Andrew
2001-03-17 Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com>

* p-exp.y (parse_number): Avoid shift overflow when ``long''.
Code copied from c-exp.y.

*** GDB/src/gdb/p-exp.y Tue Mar 6 10:38:28 2001
--- WIP/src/gdb/p-exp.y Sat Mar 17 15:46:29 2001
***************
*** 858,871 ****
}
else
{
! high_bit = (((ULONGEST)1)
! << (TARGET_LONG_LONG_BIT - 32 - 1)
! << 16
! << 16);
! if (high_bit == 0)
/* A long long does not fit in a LONGEST. */
! high_bit =
! (ULONGEST)1 << (sizeof (LONGEST) * HOST_CHAR_BIT - 1);
unsigned_type = builtin_type_unsigned_long_long;
signed_type = builtin_type_long_long;
}
--- 858,870 ----
}
else
{
! int shift;
! if (sizeof (ULONGEST) * HOST_CHAR_BIT < TARGET_LONG_LONG_BIT)
/* A long long does not fit in a LONGEST. */
! shift = (sizeof (ULONGEST) * HOST_CHAR_BIT - 1);
! else
! shift = (TARGET_LONG_LONG_BIT - 1);
! high_bit = (ULONGEST) 1 << shift;
unsigned_type = builtin_type_unsigned_long_long;
signed_type = builtin_type_long_long;
}
From kettenis@wins.uva.nl Sun Mar 18 15:59:00 2001
From: Mark Kettenis <kettenis@wins.uva.nl>
To: eliz@is.elta.co.il
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFA] Unified watchpoints for x86 platforms
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 15:59:00 -0000
Message-id: <200103182306.f2IN6Fv00262@delius.kettenis.local>
References: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1010318105507.11615B-100000@is>
X-SW-Source: 2001-03/msg00339.html
Content-length: 995

Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 10:56:25 +0200 (IST)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@is.elta.co.il>

On Sat, 17 Mar 2001, Mark Kettenis wrote:

> ... config/i386/nm-i386v.h is really for System V-ish systems only,
> and not a generic i386 file (the comment on the first line of that
> file is a misleading).

Not only is the comment misleading, but it looks like all the x86
targets include nm-i386v.h, so it is definitely used like a generic
i386 file!

What makes you think that? I see:

$ grep nm-i386v.h config/i386/*.h
config/i386/nm-go32.h:#include "i386/nm-i386v.h"
config/i386/nm-linux.h:#include "i386/nm-i386v.h"

Linux is a bit System V-ish, but DJGPP most certainly isn't, and in
principle it shouldn't include nm-i386v.h. None of the other x86
targets include nm-i386v.h.

> Therefore I think it's best to create a new config/i386/nm-i386.h
> file and put your stuff there instead.

Should I make nm-i386v.h include nm-i386.h, then?

I don't think so.

Mark