This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: readline rebase 5.1->6.2?
- From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
- To: tromey at redhat dot com, jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com, gdb at sourceware dot org, ktietz at redhat dot com
- Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2011 06:00:55 +0300
- Subject: Re: readline rebase 5.1->6.2?
- References: <20110322154327.GA8966@host1.jankratochvil.net> <83tyev7z7a.fsf@gnu.org> <20110322194836.GA23104@host1.jankratochvil.net> <83oc537wrs.fsf@gnu.org> <83oc4qpbdw.fsf@gnu.org> <m37hbejbpn.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <83y63tvtd2.fsf@gnu.org>
- Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
> Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2011 13:29:45 +0300
> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
> Cc: jan.kratochvil@redhat.com, gdb@sourceware.org, ktietz@redhat.com
>
> > From: Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
> > Cc: jan.kratochvil@redhat.com, gdb@sourceware.org, ktietz@redhat.com
> > Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2011 08:19:32 -0600
> >
> > >>>>> "Eli" == Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> >
> > Eli> The question is, what should we do about these patches? Submitting
> > Eli> them to upstream readline would be the best course (assuming the
> > Eli> readline maintainer is willing to include them), but that means we
> > Eli> will have to either wait for the next readline release or keep our
> > Eli> local patches for the time being.
> >
> > Yes, submit them. It is ok if it takes a while for the new readline to
> > reach our tree. The result can't be worse than our current situation.
>
> I sent a private mail to the readline maintainer with the patches.
> Let's see what he replies, and take it from there.
Chet agreed:
> Sure, I'll look at applying the patches. They'll be in the next readline
> release.
So we can now act on the assumption that the DJGPP-related patches to
readline are no longer an issue.
Note that I didn't do anything about the MinGW patches. I suggest
that their author(s) submit them to readline.