From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6739 invoked by alias); 7 Mar 2014 18:33:56 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 6686 invoked by uid 89); 7 Mar 2014 18:33:55 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 07 Mar 2014 18:33:54 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s27IXo8x015472 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 7 Mar 2014 13:33:50 -0500 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s27IXm9e010288; Fri, 7 Mar 2014 13:33:48 -0500 Message-ID: <531A110B.4060502@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2014 18:33:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130625 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Doug Evans CC: Yao Qi , Tom Tromey , Hui Zhu , gdb-patches ml Subject: Re: target-delegates.c needs some TLC [was Re: [OB PATCH] target.h (to_traceframe_info): Fix TARGET_DEFAULT_RETURN] References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2014-03/txt/msg00203.txt.bz2 On 03/06/2014 05:20 AM, Doug Evans wrote: > On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 5:36 PM, Yao Qi wrote: >> On 03/04/2014 09:18 AM, Hui Zhu wrote: >>> I cannot understand about this OB is not right. I have 2 questions to you: >>> 1. Before my patch, does target-delegates.c that generated by make-target-delegates is same with current target-delegates.c? >> >> No, as I said, I forgot to re-generate target-delegates.c. > > Hmmm.... > > I don't even see target-delegates.c in Makefile.in. That feels like a > bug. [Could be blind of course. :-)] > I realize there's a comment in target-delegates.c that says how to > regenerate it, but these kind of things are part of what makefiles are > for. This also crossed my mind when initially reviewing the series (and I'm sure Tom's too when writing it, as it's such an obvious thing), but realized this is really no different from e.g., gdbarch.h|c. So given the precedent, I don't consider this a particular bug of target-delegates.c, but a more generic "IWBN if we had Makefile rules for our generated files". Of course, I'd welcome patches in that direction. > I'm not sure I'd want to require perl for --enable-maintainer-mode > (which is a common trigger for enabling in makefiles the appropriate > rules to auto-regenerate checked-in machine-generated files), but it's > one thought. I don't see a problem there. automake is perl as well, for instance, and it's common for --enable-maintainer-mode to trigger automake/aclocal. Even if that weren't true, by configuring with --enable-maintainer-mode, by definition you're asserting you have the tools required for regular gdb maintenance, and given make-target-delegates is perl, well, any maintainer must have it handy. -- Pedro Alves