From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18558 invoked by alias); 19 Jul 2004 22:16:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 18542 invoked from network); 19 Jul 2004 22:16:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 19 Jul 2004 22:16:05 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.34 #1 (Debian)) id 1BmgPd-00049B-1Z; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 18:15:09 -0400 Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 00:30:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain Cc: brobecker@gnat.com, ac131313@redhat.com, eliz@gnu.org, gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: A.R. Index for GDB version 6.1.91_20040719 Message-ID: <20040719221508.GA15872@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain , brobecker@gnat.com, ac131313@redhat.com, eliz@gnu.org, gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <20040719221402.2A8F64B104@berman.michael-chastain.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040719221402.2A8F64B104@berman.michael-chastain.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i X-SW-Source: 2004-07/txt/msg00254.txt.bz2 On Mon, Jul 19, 2004 at 06:14:02PM -0400, Michael Chastain wrote: > joel> Back to Eli's problem: We need to have a name such that, after > joel> generation from configure, we end up with "gnat_ada.gpr" (fortunately, > joel> gnat_ada.gpr fits the 8+3 profile). Is that possible? > > Yeah, I'm testing a patch right now. > > gnat_ada.gpr.in is the default name, but AC_OUTPUT has a syntax for > specifying an explicit name, so I'm just using that. The new name will > be gnat_ada.gin if that's okay with daniel. That should work fine. > (At first I wanted to use gnat_ada.gpr_in, but then I thought: > what if someone configures in the source directory, and what if > configuration reaches down into testsuite/ even though testsuite/ > does not actually run on msdos). Correct; I don't know how configuration happens on msdos though. > Also my understanding is: if the ms-dos port actually uses the file, the > name has to fit in 8.3. But if the ms-dos port does not use the file, > the name just has to be 8.3 unique with truncation, plus some other > requirements like "no more than one dot". I think that's right. -- Daniel Jacobowitz