From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30573 invoked by alias); 8 Sep 2003 21:14:05 -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 30566 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2003 21:14:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 8 Sep 2003 21:14:04 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.22 #1 (Debian)) id 19wTKm-00070b-Ah for ; Mon, 08 Sep 2003 17:14:04 -0400 Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 21:14:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [rfa/testsuite] avoid 'gamma' function name Message-ID: <20030908211403.GA26925@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <200309082111.h88LBvq6011543@duracef.shout.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200309082111.h88LBvq6011543@duracef.shout.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-09/txt/msg00133.txt.bz2 On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 05:11:57PM -0400, Michael Elizabeth Chastain wrote: > This patchlet works around a recent change in gcc HEAD where 'gamma' is > now a reserved identifier, even when 'math.h' is not included. > > I've reported this as a regression bug against gcc: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12213 > [3.4 regression] warning: conflicting types for builtin-function 'gamma' > > I'm pretty sure this is actually a bug in gcc. A draft of the C9x spec > says that all external library names are reserved, and does not qualify > that by saying that the header file for that name has to be included. > However, the particular name 'gamma' is an obsolete name and not > mentioned in the standard. > > However -- the purpose of gdb1250.exp is to test backtracing and > prologue analysis. It's not to test C library reserved identifiers. > So this patch just avoids the issue. > > Testing: tested on native i686-pc-linux-gnu, gcc v2 and v3, dwarf-2 and > stabs+. Specifically tested with gcc HEAD that thinks 'gamma' is > a reserved identifier. > > Okay to commit? Sounds reasonable to me. I'm 99.9% sure you're right about the GCC bug, too - at least if gcc HEAD defaults to gnu99 mode? -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer