From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13187 invoked by alias); 1 Mar 2006 22:11:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 13178 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Mar 2006 22:11:25 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Mar 2006 22:11:22 +0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k21MBEU2002695; Wed, 1 Mar 2006 17:11:14 -0500 Received: from potter.sfbay.redhat.com (potter.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.15]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id k21MB8121872; Wed, 1 Mar 2006 17:11:08 -0500 Received: from [172.16.24.50] (bluegiant.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.24.50]) by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k21MB6Kt023391; Wed, 1 Mar 2006 17:11:06 -0500 Message-ID: <44061BF9.4020403@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2006 22:11:00 -0000 From: Michael Snyder User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7-1.4.1 (X11/20050929) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eli Zaretskii CC: Charles Wilson , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: RFA: ensure binary objects opened in binary mode References: <43F6473F.8030508@cwilson.fastmail.fm> <20060217234141.GA1918@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> <200602181118.k1IBIwNC028708@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <43FBF706.9030604@cwilson.fastmail.fm> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-03/txt/msg00023.txt.bz2 Eli Zaretskii wrote: >>Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 00:30:46 -0500 >>From: Charles Wilson >>CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org >> >>Okay, I've attached two patches that hopefully address all the issues >>raised in this thread. > > > Thanks. > > >>(1) for every file that #includes both defs.h AND , remove the >> inclusion. > > > I'm not sure this is a good idea. What if tomorrow we remove fcntl.h > from defs.h--do we go through all these files again and add it back? > Why bother? fcntl.h should be idempotent, so including it several > times does no real harm. It's an extra file open and file read during make. These things add up. gdb's include heirarchy is quite tangled. > I actually quite dislike source files that don't include standard > headers because they are included in defs.h and its ilk. It makes me > wonder how come foo.c uses something defined in bar.h, but there's no > "#include " anywhere in sight. A stylistic question, alas...