This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: patch to add QNX NTO i386 support



The file nm-nto.h should not be needed.  Instead define it's only macro
  local to remote-nto.c.  (Disclaimer, you're breaking new ground with
this one.  Some existing targets  don't have xm-*.h files, but I think
you're first with the no-*.h file).

Not sure what you mean by no-*.h but I see what you mean about some of the
short files.
tipo.  s/no/nm/.

>     * config/i386/nto.mh: New file

Yes, you need this, you've a native support.

Cool.  I got ONE thing right. ;-)
GDB's things to do today includes break the .mh files into .mh, .mn.
At present what you see doesn't make much sense :-)


Can you expand on how these relate to each other?

Do you want details in the ChangeLog entry other than 'new file'?  I wasn't
sure.
Not really. A full of contributors doesn't hurt. However, from the FSF's point of view, the file only comes into existance when it is approved - it has no prior history.

Yeah.  All the original code and filenames used 'qnx' and I partially
refactored to 'nto' since it seemed more appropriate to use the OS rather
than the company.  I suppose it wouldn't hurt to do the rest of it.
I think your decision to use nto was a good one - definitly more logical. Yes, now before things get committed, is the time to finish it off with s/qnx/nto/.

Thanks for all the feedback.  You've certainly given me some more work to
keep me occupied.  You're probably right about some of the code being
redundant.  Much of this stuff was brought forward from gdb 4.17 so there
may be many more redundancies.  (you should have seen how much we had ripped
out already ;-)
SNAFU.

Every branched GDB I've seen has breed superfulous[sp] changes - you should see the original version of the interp patch before Elena and then I attacked it with avengence ...

Much thanks for going through that code and stripping the unnecessary stuff out. It is much easier for all concerned, saving frustration on both ends - the reviewer having to reject junk code out of hand, and the contributor wondering why their mega jumbo patch (hey it works right? :-) isn't simply accepted.

Andrew



Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]