Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 13:22:39 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
To: Robert Hoehne <robert DOT hoehne AT gmx DOT net>
cc: Andrew Crabtree <andrewc AT rosemail DOT rose DOT hp DOT com>, djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: C++ debugging with GDB
In-Reply-To: <354F874A.70ECAC21@gmx.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.980506132217.1846D-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Precedence: bulk


On Tue, 5 May 1998, Robert Hoehne wrote:

> Since I'm also very interested in the GDB 4.17 and binutils 2.9.1, I
> made the DJGPP port already.

Great!  I didn't know you were working on that.  Andrew, I hope I
didn't get you into too much hassle over this.

Maybe we should tell more often what ports are we working on, to
prevent waist of effort.  Let me begin this trait by telling what I'm
porting these days:

	- Texinfo 3.12
	- Emacs 20.3 (a pretest, 20.3 wasn't released yet)
	- UCB Logo (almost done)
	- Web2c 7.2 (done, but I want to add a few additional utilities)

In addition, I'm actively participating in pretest of Tar, Textutils,
and Patch.

Seems like an awful lot?  Well, volunteers are welcome to take some
load off my back ;-).

> The gdb port is theoretical ready and working (tested on W95 with LFN
> and DOS 6.0).

Did you have the chance to see whether the patches I submitted about a
year and a half ago are there in GDB 4.17?  I have sent the patches to
Andrew, but maybe you already know the answer, so he won't need to
dig.

Also, what about that problem with strip in 2.8.1 whereby it aligned
the stub on 4KB boundary--is this fixed in 2.9?