* [rfa/testsuite] rename m-static1.cc to m-stat1.cc
@ 2002-09-20 8:46 David Carlton
2002-09-20 8:51 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: David Carlton @ 2002-09-20 8:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-patches; +Cc: Fernando Nasser
Andrew just pointed out to me that the presence of both m-static.cc
and m-static1.cc (in gdb.c++) violates the 8.3 rule. Is it okay if I
rename m-static1.cc to m-stat1.cc? (And make the corresponding
obvious change to m-static.exp, of course.) Or is there some other
name I should use?
David Carlton
carlton@math.stanford.edu
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [rfa/testsuite] rename m-static1.cc to m-stat1.cc
2002-09-20 8:46 [rfa/testsuite] rename m-static1.cc to m-stat1.cc David Carlton
@ 2002-09-20 8:51 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-09-20 9:10 ` David Carlton
2002-09-20 9:11 ` Andrew Cagney
0 siblings, 2 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Jacobowitz @ 2002-09-20 8:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Carlton; +Cc: gdb-patches, Fernando Nasser
On Fri, Sep 20, 2002 at 08:46:54AM -0700, David Carlton wrote:
> Andrew just pointed out to me that the presence of both m-static.cc
> and m-static1.cc (in gdb.c++) violates the 8.3 rule. Is it okay if I
> rename m-static1.cc to m-stat1.cc? (And make the corresponding
> obvious change to m-static.exp, of course.) Or is there some other
> name I should use?
I'd rather you just add them to the list; it's in
gdb/config/djgpp/fnchange.lst. Others may have a different opinion,
though..
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [rfa/testsuite] rename m-static1.cc to m-stat1.cc
2002-09-20 8:51 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
@ 2002-09-20 9:10 ` David Carlton
2002-09-20 9:11 ` Andrew Cagney
1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: David Carlton @ 2002-09-20 9:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Daniel Jacobowitz; +Cc: gdb-patches, Fernando Nasser
On Fri, 20 Sep 2002 11:51:44 -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com> said:
> On Fri, Sep 20, 2002 at 08:46:54AM -0700, David Carlton wrote:
>> Andrew just pointed out to me that the presence of both m-static.cc
>> and m-static1.cc (in gdb.c++) violates the 8.3 rule. Is it okay if
>> I rename m-static1.cc to m-stat1.cc? (And make the corresponding
>> obvious change to m-static.exp, of course.) Or is there some other
>> name I should use?
> I'd rather you just add them to the list; it's in
> gdb/config/djgpp/fnchange.lst. Others may have a different opinion,
> though..
Well, me too, actually, now that you mention the possibility. Now I'm
curious about just how that list gets used, though: to run the
testsuite properly, the .exp file needs to know the correct filename
to compile; does somebody do that by hand? (Looking in the
config/djgpp directory, I see a script 'djcheck.sh' which seems a bit
strange.)
To complicate matters, I see that some but by no means all of the c++
testsuite files are already listed in fnchange.lst, but with their
containing directory changed from gdb.c++ to gdb.cxx. So should I add
lines for all the m-static stuff to fnchange.lst, like this?
@V@/gdb/testsuite/gdb.c++/m-static.exp @V@/gdb/testsuite/gdb.cxx/m-static.exp
@V@/gdb/testsuite/gdb.c++/m-static.cc @V@/gdb/testsuite/gdb.cxx/m-static.cc
@V@/gdb/testsuite/gdb.c++/m-static.h @V@/gdb/testsuite/gdb.cxx/m-static.h
@V@/gdb/testsuite/gdb.c++/m-static1.cc @V@/gdb/testsuite/gdb.cxx/m-stat1.cc
Or just one line, like this?
@V@/gdb/testsuite/gdb.c++/m-static1.cc @V@/gdb/testsuite/gdb.c++/m-stat1.cc
David Carlton
carlton@math.stanford.edu
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [rfa/testsuite] rename m-static1.cc to m-stat1.cc
2002-09-20 8:51 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-09-20 9:10 ` David Carlton
@ 2002-09-20 9:11 ` Andrew Cagney
1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Cagney @ 2002-09-20 9:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Daniel Jacobowitz; +Cc: David Carlton, gdb-patches, Fernando Nasser
> On Fri, Sep 20, 2002 at 08:46:54AM -0700, David Carlton wrote:
>
>> Andrew just pointed out to me that the presence of both m-static.cc
>> and m-static1.cc (in gdb.c++) violates the 8.3 rule. Is it okay if I
>> rename m-static1.cc to m-stat1.cc? (And make the corresponding
>> obvious change to m-static.exp, of course.) Or is there some other
>> name I should use?
>
>
> I'd rather you just add them to the list; it's in
> gdb/config/djgpp/fnchange.lst. Others may have a different opinion,
> though..
Yes. Per:
http://sources.redhat.com/gdb/current/onlinedocs/gdbint_13.html#SEC122
This isn't a file needed to build GDB so fnchange.lst is ok.
Andrew
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2002-09-20 16:11 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2002-09-20 8:46 [rfa/testsuite] rename m-static1.cc to m-stat1.cc David Carlton
2002-09-20 8:51 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-09-20 9:10 ` David Carlton
2002-09-20 9:11 ` Andrew Cagney
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox