Re: gdb is broken?
Martin Schulze writes:
> J.H.M. Dassen Ray" wrote:
> > In the current egcs packages, several patches are applied at build time
> > (rather than in the .diff.gz already); this should be doable for gdb too.
> > The threads patch could then only be applied on the architectures which it
> > supports. This to me seems the best solution: i386 has threads support, and
> > non-i386 works as before.
>
> Lame question but why not use defines such as __i386__, __m68k__
> etc. like it is done with libraries or so?
Lame answer :) It makes too much work to patch patches. It's much easier
to only apply them for the architecture that need it.
The patch schema in the egcs packages has still a drawback. The
patches aren't unapplied in the exact reverse order. That should be
doable too, but what about a patch file which patches a file more than
one time?
Btw, is somebody working on a gdb NMU?
Reply to: