From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 939 invoked by alias); 14 Feb 2004 15:54:29 -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 305 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2004 15:54:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (24.157.170.238) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 14 Feb 2004 15:54:23 -0000 Received: from gnu.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B19D42B97; Sat, 14 Feb 2004 10:54:23 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <402E44AF.2030801@gnu.org> Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 15:54:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030820 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Time for a HP/PA hackathon? References: <20040214031427.AA14B4B104@berman.michael-chastain.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-02/txt/msg00366.txt.bz2 > What happens if -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE is added? (Not sure of the >> correct way to do that in BFD though). > > > "./gdb ./gdb" ; "break main" ; "run" works. > > And it works with gdb built with gcc 3.3.2, ansi c B11.11, > and aC++ A.03.45. I've checked in a (hopeful) fix. > I do think you're opening up a big can of worms shortly before > the 6.1 branch though. The 64-bit off_t, enabling the TUI, the HP/UX frame update, or the BFD file I/O rewrite? Of these, it's the TUI that scares me me the most. History shows that only after we've released do we learn about the breakage on the non- mainstream systems. I do wonder if the next binutils branch should be held off until after GDB's been released - so that it can learn from GDB's mistakes :-) Andrew PS: You haven't seen my post 6.1 branch backlog :-)