This is the mail archive of the 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] 32 bit-ism in lm32-tdep.c (and some sloppy macros)

On Monday 14 November 2011 16:20:36, Tom Tromey wrote:
> >>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves <> writes:
> Pedro> On Monday 14 November 2011 15:48:48, Tom Tromey wrote:
> >> I was a little surprised to find out we already use int16_t in gdb.
> Pedro> We pull stdint.h from gnulib.
> I was meaning to ask ... do we have a gnulib update policy?

I don't think we do.  I think we've updated about twice only since
adding gnulib, and it was because there was something new in gnulib
that we needed.  I've done it once.

> I wanted to pull in stdbool.h and start using bool in gdb; plus maybe
> some other bits so we can use O_CLOEXEC and friends (but only maybe --
> it isn't clear to me that gnulib is the best way to tackle this
> problem).  Anyway, then I noticed that the existing files are not
> up-to-date against gnulib git.
> It seemed to me that updating now, just before a release, was maybe not
> the best time.  Any thoughts?

Agreed.  After release sounds best.  Do you know if gnulib follows any sort
of stable release/period in their trunk?  That is, is there any time that
is better for pulling current gnulib state that is better or worse
then others, in terms of pulling in gnulib bugs or works-in-progress?

Pedro Alves

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