Date:	Mon, 3 Apr 2000 10:57:50 +0200 (IST)
From:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender:	eliz AT is
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: Gdb and floating point
In-Reply-To:	<Pine.A41.4.05.10004031011540.47140-100000@ieva05.lanet.lv>
Message-ID:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.1000403105513.26246H-100000@is>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Mon, 3 Apr 2000, Andris Pavenis wrote:

> > > Also. Had to hack RHIDE rather much to be able to build it using this
> > > snapshot.
> > 
> > Could you summarize the problems you had with building RHIDE?  Is
> > there something in GDB 5.0 that should be changed to make it easier?
> 
> I don't think so. RHIDE should be modified in this case.

Perhaps in the long run RHIDE should switch to the GDB-mi interface 
instead of the annotations.  It seems like the GDB developers want to 
deprecate annotations, they are kept mainly because Emacs uses that 
interface.

Note that currently, the DJGPP version of GDB is built without GDB-mi.  I 
need time (which I don't have ;-) to work on adding that.

- Raw text -