From: Mark Kettenis <kettenis@wins.uva.nl>
To: gdb-patches@cygnus.com
Subject: 4.17.85 Feedback
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 1999 08:22:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <199903041622.RAA09527@landau.wins.uva.nl> (raw)
I have tested the prerelease on the Hurd and encountered some small
compilation problems.
The first problem is caused by the following change:
Thu Dec 31 16:54:30 1998 David Taylor <taylor@texas.cygnus.com>
* inferior.h (proc_wait): Declare.
The Hurd already has a proc_wait RPC so the prototype in
<hurd/process.h> clashes with the one in "inferior.h". Both files
need to be included in `gnu-nat.c' since it implements some of the
functions in "inferior.h" by using functions provided by
<hurd/process.h>. Is there any chance that th above patch will be
reverted? Of course it is possible to hack around the prototype
clash, by writing
#define proc_wait xxx_proc_wait
#include <hurd/process.h>
#undef proc_wait
but that's a bit ugly. Anyway if that's the way to go, I'll provide
the patch, hust ask me.
I'll send some patches to solve the other problems later today.
Anyway, gdb 4.17.85 seems to work just as well as 4.17 did.
Mark
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID
From: Mark Kettenis <kettenis@wins.uva.nl>
To: gdb-patches@cygnus.com
Subject: 4.17.85 Feedback
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 00:00:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <199903041622.RAA09527@landau.wins.uva.nl> (raw)
Message-ID: <19990401000000.Tr0X6oHJWRFb-43O5GR2lUqZhVt-3sbtB8C7ichCi9k@z> (raw)
I have tested the prerelease on the Hurd and encountered some small
compilation problems.
The first problem is caused by the following change:
Thu Dec 31 16:54:30 1998 David Taylor <taylor@texas.cygnus.com>
* inferior.h (proc_wait): Declare.
The Hurd already has a proc_wait RPC so the prototype in
<hurd/process.h> clashes with the one in "inferior.h". Both files
need to be included in `gnu-nat.c' since it implements some of the
functions in "inferior.h" by using functions provided by
<hurd/process.h>. Is there any chance that th above patch will be
reverted? Of course it is possible to hack around the prototype
clash, by writing
#define proc_wait xxx_proc_wait
#include <hurd/process.h>
#undef proc_wait
but that's a bit ugly. Anyway if that's the way to go, I'll provide
the patch, hust ask me.
I'll send some patches to solve the other problems later today.
Anyway, gdb 4.17.85 seems to work just as well as 4.17 did.
Mark
next reply other threads:[~1999-03-04 8:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1999-03-04 8:22 Mark Kettenis [this message]
1999-04-01 0:00 ` Michael Snyder
1999-03-04 9:19 ` Michael Snyder
1999-04-01 0:00 ` Mark Kettenis
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=199903041622.RAA09527@landau.wins.uva.nl \
--to=kettenis@wins.uva.nl \
--cc=gdb-patches@cygnus.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox