From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20580 invoked by alias); 19 May 2008 21:29:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 20571 invoked by uid 22791); 19 May 2008 21:29:31 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 19 May 2008 21:29:12 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13AE3983FE; Mon, 19 May 2008 21:29:05 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCBF19835A; Mon, 19 May 2008 21:29:04 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1JyCul-0000EM-PC; Mon, 19 May 2008 17:29:03 -0400 Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 06:38:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Thiago Jung Bauermann Cc: Tea , Michael Snyder , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: GDB record patch 0.1.3.1 for GDB-6.8 release Message-ID: <20080519212903.GA869@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Thiago Jung Bauermann , Tea , Michael Snyder , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <1211231955.32587.23.camel@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1211231955.32587.23.camel@localhost.localdomain> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2008-05-11) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-05/txt/msg00582.txt.bz2 On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 06:19:15PM -0300, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: > I wonder if there is a way to get these sizes by including the Linux > kernel header files? The way it is done here looks very fragile and tied > to a specific Linux kernel version to me... > > Granted, using kernel includes will still be fragile and > version-specific, but at least to update GDB only a recompile is needed, > as oposed to manually figuring out and editing these #defines. No, this way is better. These are not types used internally by the kernel; they're part of its public interface and will not change. And the headers are in good shape nowadays but the clean headers are not universally available yet. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery