On Wed, 2013-07-31 at 01:54 +0100, peter green wrote:
> Samuel Bronson wrote:
> > Since libgdb.a has been dropped upstream, we've dropped libgdb-dev
> > entirely now, and fp is going to need to come up with a different plan
> > for debugger support.
> >
> Personally I tend to think we should jus
Samuel Bronson wrote:
Since libgdb.a has been dropped upstream, we've dropped libgdb-dev
entirely now, and fp is going to need to come up with a different plan
for debugger support.
Personally I tend to think we should just embed an appropriate version
of the libgdb source in the fpc source p
Since libgdb.a has been dropped upstream, we've dropped libgdb-dev
entirely now, and fp is going to need to come up with a different plan
for debugger support.
(For what it's worth, I get the impression that IDEs linking against
libgdb have tended not to support the version of gdb in the archive
3 matches
Mail list logo
