From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5579 invoked by alias); 26 Jun 2009 17:45:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 5517 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Jun 2009 17:45:24 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx2.redhat.com (HELO mx2.redhat.com) (66.187.237.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 17:45:12 +0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n5QHhApq004149; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 13:43:10 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n5QHh9OG018270; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 13:43:09 -0400 Received: from opsy.redhat.com (vpn-225-10.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.225.10]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n5QHh8C7017259; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 13:43:08 -0400 Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 960E1508250; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 11:43:07 -0600 (MDT) To: Pedro Alves Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: RFC: parallelize "make check" References: <200906252359.02953.pedro@codesourcery.com> From: Tom Tromey Reply-To: Tom Tromey Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 17:45:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <200906252359.02953.pedro@codesourcery.com> (Pedro Alves's message of "Thu\, 25 Jun 2009 23\:59\:02 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 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 X-SW-Source: 2009-06/txt/msg00750.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves writes: Pedro> [[[ seriously, am I the only one that would prefer that gdb and Pedro> the whole of src move into the same repository as gcc, which Pedro> would allow easier sharing of code between the projects, and Pedro> more easily spring up new shared libraries? Think reusing Pedro> bits of gcc in gdb :-) (other than libiberty). I daydreamed a bit about putting parts of the front ends into gdb... correct expression parsing! A C interpreter! We could get statement expressions to work! In the end I figured that the programs are different enough that the work would be massive, and the payoff not large enough. I don't know what else from gcc I'd want to use. Tom