From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24968 invoked by alias); 8 Feb 2002 16:57:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 24889 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2002 16:57:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (128.2.145.6) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 8 Feb 2002 16:57:17 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16ZEKp-0005l3-00; Fri, 08 Feb 2002 11:57:15 -0500 Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2002 08:57:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Andrew Cagney Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, "Martin M. Hunt" Subject: Re: [RFA] fix for utils.c bool problem Message-ID: <20020208115715.A21971@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Cagney , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, "Martin M. Hunt" References: <200202072133.NAA28346@cygnus.com> <20020207163944.A30605@nevyn.them.org> <20020208105750.A16802@nevyn.them.org> <3C6401FE.1060302@cygnus.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3C6401FE.1060302@cygnus.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23i X-SW-Source: 2002-02/txt/msg00234.txt.bz2 On Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 11:51:10AM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote: > >This is the patch I alluded to earlier today on binutils@. It's not > >>quite complete, since TUI is also affected; I've attached mine. I'm > >>quite surprised that this fixes the problem for you without the > >>corresponding bfd patch that I haven't committed yet! > > > > > >No one objected, so I've committed this. As far as I know GDB should > >build everywhere it used to before I started playing with bool, as long > >as you update both BFD and GDB. If I'm wrong, please let me know. > > > Dan I couldn't see the point of the patch. The immediate problem - > bfd.h including was fixed. The next step, I thought, was > fix bfd.h. It isn't hurting in a major way and definitly breaks GDB's > coding style. Sorry if I missed an objection. I was a little out of it yesterday. The immediate problem was -not- fixed. To start back at the beginning again: - On my machine, running a current Debian system, includes . We have to live with that. There's nothing I can particularly do about it. - The way I tried to fix this was by also using stdbool.h if it was available. But conflicts with an awful lot of existing code. This is unfortunate, and this is where the proper fix lies, IMO. - The way I settled on fixing this, and committed, was to use if something included before bfd.h had already brought it in. This appears to work in all cases. I strongly want to avoid leaving GDB unbuildable on this class of systems. I don't have any particular attachment to my patch. I would love to revert it, as soon as there is an alternative solution in place. -- Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer