* [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