Re: Which version of gdb supports gcc 3.0 ABI?

[Christopher Faylor <cgf at redhat dot com>]

On Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 07:50:03PM +0100, Steinar Bang wrote:
>>>>>> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@delorie.com>:
>
>> FWIW, I always had the GDB patches I posted as an RFA approved or
>> commented on in reasonable time (i.e. about a week).
>
>> In any case, a fork is not something people should consider easily,
>> just because someone's patch is not accepted quickly enough.
>
>Maybe so.
>
>But the lack of C++ support for gcc 3.0 is a problem.
>And it will become a _huge_ problem when gcc 3.0 is released.
>
>It must be adressed in some way, I think.  And a fork sounds like the
>best alternative.

Again, I have to point out that DANIEL BERLIN IS THE C++ MAINTAINER for
gdb.  If people have issues with C++, they should be letting Daniel know
about them.

FYI, Daniel neglected to mention that we (Red Hat) have three people
working on the 3.0 problem (one of whom is him) and should have a
solution, soon.

I also again suggest that rather than jump up and down talking about
forks, go over to the gdb mailing lists and read about what is going
on.  Then you can draw opinions based on facts.

cgf