Re: [RFA] Type cleanups

Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-05-13T18:59:39Z

On Mon, May 13, 2002 at 02:50:31PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Mon, May 13, 2002 at 11:37:29AM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> >
> > >>Did you check all the cross targets build per MAINTAINERS? From memory
> > >>sh-hms[bfd] and avr[need to look] don't build at present (well as of
> > >>~2002-05-12-gmt).
> > >>
> > >>If that has been checked, then yes ``obviously''.
> > >
> > >
> > >A few don't build; none of them are my fault. For the record:
> > >
> > > At least fr30-elf, mn10300-elf, and v850-elf have missing
> > >dependencies off in sim/ land; they built with non-parallel make only.
> >
> > > hppa1.1-hp-proelf wants dl.h and machine/save_state.h in
> > >hppa-tdep.c, and was already marked broken. The nice gawk segment
> > >doesn't notice that...
> >
> > HP/UX isn't on the list. I get:
> >
> > hppa1.1-hp-proelf broken
> >
> > The note should probably mention that you normally want to stip out
> > broken targets.
> >
> > > Several targets (i586-pc-msdosdjgpp, sparc-elf, sparc64-elf)
> > > failed with this message (also JB_SP for Sparc):
> > >
> > >In file included from /usr/include/setjmp.h:30,
> > > from ../../src-build/gdb/top.c:58:
> > >/usr/include/bits/setjmp.h:31: warning: `JB_PC' redefined
> > >tm.h:57: warning: this is the location of the previous definition
> > >make[1]: *** [top.o] Error 1
> >
> > I don't get that on the three systems I use. Bug in the system library?
>
> Hmm, I'm not sure where the necessary preprocessor definitions are
> coming from to make that definition visible. I'll look in to it.

Answer: apparently it is standards-conforming to define JB_* in
<setjmp.h>. This means that all of the tm-*.h files which define JB_
variables are somewhat dubious. We should probably rename our copies
of these constants. And kill the ones we don't use, which amounts to
almost all of them.

--
Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer