Re: thirty-third thread == kaput

[Kevin Buettner <kevinb at cygnus dot com>]

On Apr 18, 11:04am, Jeffrey W. Baker wrote:

> Do you think the patch doesn't apply because of major changes to
> data or algorithms, or just because code has moved around?  The
> patch is enormous and hairy.

Mostly due to code shifting a bit or new code being added.  There
were also rejects due to some files being obsoleted.

> As an outsider, I would say that the best strategy is to get the
> patch to where it applies, compiles, and runs, then commit it ASAP. 
> That will probably break GDB for a while, but it means that this
> important feature will actually get fixed.  Otherwise, it gets
> easier over time to just put off the fix because it becomes harder
> and harder to do.

I'm working on it again and have a patch out which should apply
cleanly.  See:

    http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2001-04/msg00240.html

I'm going to be committing the patch in phases.  See the introductory
text to the patch for more details.

Kevin