[kaffe] Re: moving config/superh to config/sh

[Kiyo Inaba]

Sorry, I miss this mail.

>I'd like to rename the config/superh directory to config/sh to go with
>the usuall gnu toolchain names for superh processors (sh*).

Yeah, everytime I think we have to change it to be compatible with
gnu toolchain. I am not sure why Transvirtual's guy use this name
but in long run, 'sh' should be better.

(My personal preference is superh rather than sh because the name
'sh' is too short and in some sence easy to mislead, but this is
the name selected by gnu and much better to obey their idea...)

>That would let us drop the patch-config.sub-superh.diff, I believe, and
>fix the problems when config.sub in kaffe and libltdl are not in sync
>due to the patch no longer applying.
>
>ok to proceed?

Please go ahead.

By the way, aren't there anyone who volunteer to modify jit-xxx.def
to be compatible with jit3-xxx.def? Originally these two files are
very close, but when we remove some warning these two files (or
precisely speaking pairs of these files) becomes much different.
This make me so hard to check the behavior of jit3-m68k.def against
jit-m68k.def...

# Or shall I do that? :-)

Kiyo