This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: RFC: introduce common.m4
- From: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
- To: Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>
- Cc: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 11:48:57 -0600
- Subject: Re: RFC: introduce common.m4
- References: <871u9zomzd dot fsf at fleche dot redhat dot com> <51782A71 dot 7030305 at redhat dot com> <87obd3n4c8 dot fsf at fleche dot redhat dot com> <51782CC6 dot 9040008 at redhat dot com> <871u9zn0wa dot fsf at fleche dot redhat dot com> <517ACB2C dot 2030006 at redhat dot com>
>>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> writes:
[ old-ish thread... ]
Pedro> IMO, it's a little better if each subdirectory treats the
Pedro> others more as black boxes. gdb/ relying on common/'s
Pedro> HAVE_FOO checks feels like gdb/ relying on common/'s
Pedro> implementation details to me. But I don't want to impose.
Yeah, I agree. When I refresh this patch I will do it this way.
Lately I have been thinking that common and gdbserver should be
top-level directories (after renaming "common" something more suitable).
This would let us use libiberty in gdbserver while still preserving, I
think, the ability to build gdbserver separately. Also it would let us
treat "common" as a true library, not as the odd beast it is today.
Perhaps gnulib would also have to be pushed up.
Tom