RFA: next gettextization step
Andrew Cagney
ac131313@cygnus.com
Mon Jun 24 10:05:00 GMT 2002
> Index: ChangeLog
> from Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
>
> * main.c: Marked all strings with _().
> * configure: Rebuilt.
> * configure.in (PACKAGE): New subst.
> (AC_OUTPUT): Create po/Makefile.in and po/Makefile.
> (SUBDIRS): Added po.
> * po/gdb.pot: New file.
> * po/POTFILES.in: New file.
> * po/.cvsignore: New file.
> * po/Make-in: New file.
BTW, I've hit problems doing GDB releases in the past due to these files
and their makefile rules (unfortunatly I've lost the details) - from
memory a make clean was zapping the files and it tried to do strange
things when the source was on a read-only file system. I note H.J. is
currently raising what look like the problems I encountered on the
BINUTILS list.
Anyway, looking in the opcodes directory, the CVS repository appears to
contain the following generated files:
opcodes.pot (aka gdb.pot)
*.gmo
I'm wondering if it would be better to handle these generated files the
same wah as for LEX and YACC output - the release/snapshot process
generates those files.
thoughts?
Andrew
More information about the Gdb-patches
mailing list