From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@gnat.com>
To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: [RFC] want to #undef HAVE_SBRK and HAVE_POLL on Interix
Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 23:11:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20021021061151.GY7331@gnat.com> (raw)
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1744 bytes --]
Hello,
This is something I did sometime ago, and wanted to discuss with you
before proposing a change more formally.
Here goes: On Interix, the sbrk() function exists, but is not
sufficiently implemented to be used in GDB. Because it exists,
AC_CHECK_FUNCS (sbrk) finds it, and therefore configure adds the
associated "#define HAVE_SBRK" in config.h.
If you look at xm-interix.h in the files I recently submitted, you will
see that there is a "#undef HAVE_SBRK" to counter the result of
AC_CHECK_FUNCS. I would like to get rid of this #undef. To do that, the
only way I found is to either:
1. let configure test for sbrk() on Interix, but then override the
test result afterward by undefining (in the configure sense)
HAVE_SBRK. Something like:
AC_CHECK_FUNCS (....) # this line is unchanged
case "${host}" in
*-*-interix* )
undefine (HAVE_BRK)
;;
* )
;;
esac
2. do not do the AC_CHECK_FUNCS test for sbrk() on Interix. This way,
HAVE_SBRK will never be defined, and we don't need the undef in
xm-interix.h anymore.
I did not find a way in the documentation to undefine a variable that
was previously defined. So I could not implement 1. I also thought that
a user might find it confusing to see the output of configure show
Checking for sbrk... yes
and then no see HAVE_SBRK defined in config.h...
So I implemented 2. A patch is attached (it is only the configure.in
part, the rest will follow if the approach to the problem is approved).
I also did the same for the poll() function, which should not be used
on Interix as well.
Is it the best approach to the problem? Would such a patch be accepted
for inclusion?
Thanks,
--
Joel
[-- Attachment #2: configure.in.diff --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 1607 bytes --]
Index: configure.in
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/configure.in,v
retrieving revision 1.91
diff -c -3 -p -r1.91 configure.in
*** configure.in 20 Sep 2002 00:24:01 -0000 1.91
--- configure.in 21 Oct 2002 05:52:28 -0000
*************** AC_HEADER_STAT
*** 134,141 ****
AC_C_CONST
AC_C_INLINE
! AC_CHECK_FUNCS(bcopy btowc bzero canonicalize_file_name isascii poll \
! realpath sbrk setpgid setpgrp sigaction sigprocmask sigsetmask )
AC_FUNC_ALLOCA
AC_FUNC_VFORK
dnl AC_FUNC_SETPGRP does not work when cross compiling
--- 134,161 ----
AC_C_CONST
AC_C_INLINE
! AC_CHECK_FUNCS(bcopy btowc bzero canonicalize_file_name isascii \
! realpath setpgid setpgrp sigaction sigprocmask sigsetmask )
!
! # Certain systems implement broken or incomplete versions of some
! # functions, which cause AC_CHECK_FUNCS to define the associated HAVE_*
! # macro. But we actually do not want to this macro to be defined on
! # these systems where we know it is broken. So we simply skip the test
! # for these functions and pretend that it does not exist.
! case "${host}" in
! *-*-interix*)
! # On Interix, there is only a minimal sbrk(). This function does not
! # provide the functionality that is needed in the case of GDB (there
! # is no relationship at all with environ).
!
! # The poll() function is only partially implemented so far...
! ;;
! *)
! AC_CHECK_FUNCS(sbrk)
! AC_CHECK_FUNCS(poll)
! ;;
! esac
!
AC_FUNC_ALLOCA
AC_FUNC_VFORK
dnl AC_FUNC_SETPGRP does not work when cross compiling
next reply other threads:[~2002-10-21 6:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-10-20 23:11 Joel Brobecker [this message]
2002-10-21 12:08 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-10-21 21:48 ` Joel Brobecker
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=20021021061151.GY7331@gnat.com \
--to=brobecker@gnat.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.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