Re: MinGW build failure for GDB 8.2.90 with source-highlight

[Simon Marchi <simon.marchi@polymtl.ca>]

On 2019-03-12 06:52, Pedro Alves wrote:
>> Pedro, did you have a branch where you put all of gdb in the gdb 
>> namespace?  I only found this branch, but it's using the gnulib:: 
>> namespace, which is not the same.
>> 
>> https://github.com/palves/gdb/commits/palves/cxx-gnulib-namespace
>> 
> 
> Right, not that one.  That was the first attempt, and then I almost 
> posted
> that one upstream at the time.  I was about to press 'git send-email' 
> but
> got cold feet, thinking there must be a better way.  That's when
> I tried the "namespace gdb" approach instead.  And that one is in
> the branch I pointed at in my previous message:
> 
>> Prototyped here:
>>  https://github.com/palves/gdb/commits/palves/cxx-gdb-namespace
> 
> Note: cxx-gdb-namespace != cxx-gnulib-namespace

Ah oops, sorry about that, it was late!

>> I just started to try to do it to get a feel of what's needed.  I 
>> guess we need to put pretty much everything except includes (and maybe 
>> some other rare exceptions) between namespace gdb { ... }?  And of 
>> course define GNULIB_NAMESPACE to gdb.
> Yes, that's the gist of it.
> 
> I've actually been working on that since Friday.  Spent a chunk of the 
> weekend
> on it, and some time yesterday.  Meant to reply back yesterday, but 
> something
> got in the way.
> 
> I have a script in the branch that does a good chunk of the work, but
> unfortunately,
> it still requires a lot of manual touching up.  I thought the rebase 
> would be
> trivial, but with all the new files and churn in the codebase since 
> 2016, it
> still involved a lot of manual re-work.

I can imagine.

> I have it building on x86-64 now.
> I've forced pushed what I have now.  The branch has >130 patches
> currently, most of
> the them are small per-file patches.  I need to clean this up a bit, 
> squash some
> of the fixes-on-fixes patches.  I'm not exactly sure how to post this 
> to the
> list...

I don't really see how this can be done incrementally, it would be 
really complicated to add the namespace to just some files, I think.  So 
I don't see any other choice than one big patch.  Plus maybe some others 
for preparation cleanups.  Ideally the big patch would be trivial and 
not move too much things around.

> And also, of course this needs at least build-testing on a wider set
> of hosts/cross compilers.  Maybe people could take a preliminary look 
> at the
> branch, see if they agree with direction?

I diffed the files that I modified manually when just trying it out 
yesterday with the same files in your branch, and there is no 
significant difference.  I think the direction you took is fine.

Simon