GDB 5.1?

Andrew Cagney
Tue Jul 4 19:37:00 GMT 2000

Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2000 19:02:17 +1000
> > From: Andrew Cagney <>
> >
> > Now is probably the time to start to think about another GDB release.
> > Should it occure, and if so when?  What should be fixed, what would be
> > nice to fix?
> What about rearranging the source tree so as to avoid file-name
> problems on 8+3 filesystems, and get rid of the ugly fnchange.lst
> kludge?  I volunteer to suggest the new structure if people agree with
> making this happen.

Possibly too much change :-(  5.1 is already going to see (assuming
KevinB keeps up his blistering pace) an almost pure ISO-C source tree. 
The other big ticket items on the table is auto-make-a-fying GDB and
enabling MI, I'd like to pace things a little :-)

I suspect that by 5.2 (Summer 00/01 time frame (1) :-) it is going to be
far clearer as to what is going to be in and what is going to be out. 
Things I suspect are out (to be deleted) include:

		subsumed by autoconf?
		kind of useless when all it
		contains is:
		#define GDB_MULT_ARCH 1
	all the obsolete code will be gone

similarly there is the question of how to correctly break down the
*-tdep.c files.

To address the immediate concerns, I'll get around to tweeking the build
process so that it verifies fnchange.lst.


(1) For the geographically challenged, I mean December-March ;-)

More information about the Gdb mailing list