Re: What is keeping GDB in CVS ?

[Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha@arm.com>]

On Fri, 2009-06-19 at 12:49 -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 12:37:53PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> > I still think that the various projects merged under the "src" umbrella
> > should be pulled apart and given their own repositories.  There is
> > really, for instance, no reason for Cygwin or cgen, which are non-FSF
> > projects, to be intermingled with gdb and binutils.
> > 
> > However, I am very sympathetic to the notion that "It ain't broke..."
> 
> The solution I'd like best, I think, is one with separate projects
> that makes it easy to manually or automatically sync revisions from
> the shared directories.  This may be nothing more than some clever
> push hooks, for instance to reject manual changes to bfd/ being pushed
> to the central gdb repository and to automatically propogate changes
> to bfd/ from binutils.  Anyone feeling inspired enough to build a
> proof-of-concept?
> 
As someone who builds complete cross toolchains on a regular basis, I'd
prefer for things not to become too fragmented.  My preferred split
would be for those tools that share source infrastructure to remain
combined (binutils/gas/gdb) and maybe split out the others.  It would be
a right royal pain to have to edit three copies of an identical file
when developing and testing -- it's bad enough having gcc outside of the
infrastructure.

R.