From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3375 invoked by alias); 16 Sep 2008 17:15:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 3297 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Sep 2008 17:15:09 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx2.redhat.com (HELO mx2.redhat.com) (66.187.237.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 16 Sep 2008 17:14:33 +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 m8GHDRem022810; Tue, 16 Sep 2008 13:13:47 -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 m8GHDFG3020928; Tue, 16 Sep 2008 13:13:16 -0400 Received: from opsy.redhat.com (vpn-10-121.bos.redhat.com [10.16.10.121]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m8GHDEka023335; Tue, 16 Sep 2008 13:13:14 -0400 Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 69D40C88062; Tue, 16 Sep 2008 11:13:06 -0600 (MDT) To: jeremy.bennett@embecosm.com Cc: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Problem (and solution) building from CVS References: <1221571471.2827.324.camel@thomas> <1221572833.2827.334.camel@thomas> From: Tom Tromey Reply-To: tromey@redhat.com X-Attribution: Tom Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 17:15:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <1221572833.2827.334.camel@thomas> (Jeremy Bennett's message of "Tue\, 16 Sep 2008 14\:47\:13 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-09/txt/msg00105.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Jeremy" == Jeremy Bennett writes: Jeremy> CVS and its GIT mirror should not differ (I don't think it's a Jeremy> transient of today). That needs checking. We purposely omitted gdbtk from the git mirror. My impression is that few gdb developers regularly build gdbtk. I think that most times I have tried it in the past 6 months or so, it has failed to build for one reason or another. (There are windows where it builds, but it is usually quickly broken again.) One could argue that the git decision was a bad choice. To my mind it just reflects gdbtk's own state -- limbo. Tom