From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-13505-listarch-gdb-patches=sourceware.cygnus.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 3093 invoked by alias); 19 Mar 2002 18:48:02 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 2990 invoked from network); 19 Mar 2002 18:47:49 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO cygnus.com) (205.180.230.5)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 19 Mar 2002 18:47:49 -0000
Received: from localhost.redhat.com (cse.cygnus.com [205.180.230.236])
	by runyon.cygnus.com (8.8.7-cygnus/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA07487;
	Tue, 19 Mar 2002 10:47:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 469)
	id 5B664112E4; Tue, 19 Mar 2002 13:47:22 -0500 (EST)
From: Elena Zannoni <ezannoni@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <15511.34746.193064.112834@localhost.redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 10:48:00 -0000
To: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com>
Cc: Elena Zannoni <ezannoni@redhat.com>, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: GDB CVS won't build on OSF4.0's cc
In-Reply-To: <orbsdkjtoo.fsf@free.redhat.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>
References: <org0dofodw.fsf@guarana.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>
	<or3d9ofncw.fsf@guarana.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>
	<15134.37007.772051.431723@kwikemart.cygnus.com>
	<or66e5ckl5.fsf@guarana.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>
	<15140.51449.939073.693253@kwikemart.cygnus.com>
	<orit89qkmo.fsf@free.redhat.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>
	<15511.30770.115770.867801@localhost.redhat.com>
	<orbsdkjtoo.fsf@free.redhat.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>
X-Mailer: VM 7.00 under Emacs 20.7.1
X-SW-Source: 2002-03/txt/msg00357.txt.bz2

Alexandre Oliva writes:
 > On Mar 19, 2002, Elena Zannoni <ezannoni@redhat.com> wrote:
 > 
 > > OK, I think this is fine now, but you forgot one PTR in defs.h, see
 > > below.
 > 
 > It was not forgotten, but rather intentionally left in.  Since some
 > compilers are picky about differences between PTR and void*, and there
 > still are a number of function definitions and declarations that used
 > PTR, I thought I wouldn't take such a bold step at this time.
 > 

Ok, then. 

 > > Check it in, thanks.
 > 
 > Mainline and 5.2 branch?
 > 

I think build failures fixes qualify for 5.2. Is there a bug report
for this?

Elena

 > -- 
 > Alexandre Oliva   Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
 > Red Hat GCC Developer                  aoliva@{cygnus.com, redhat.com}
 > CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp        oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
 > Free Software Evangelist                Professional serial bug killer