Re: GDB 16.0.90 available for testing

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2025 08:48:51 +0400
> From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
> Cc: brobecker@adacore.com, Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>, ssbssa@yahoo.de,
> 	gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> 
> > > > > 1. A compilation error in readline/input.c, due to lack of 'alarm'
> > > > > function.  I have reported that several months ago to the upstream
> > > > > Readline developers, but the solution they installed only works for
> > > > > MinGW64.  For mingw.org we need the following patch:
> > > > >
> > > > > --- readline/readline/input.c~0    2024-12-29 04:50:07.000000000 +0200
> > > > > +++ readline/readline/input.c    2024-12-29 12:32:04.196630800 +0200
> > > > > @@ -151,6 +151,14 @@ win32_isatty (int fd)
> > > > > #  define RL_TIMEOUT_USE_SELECT
> > > > > #else
> > > > > #  define RL_TIMEOUT_USE_SIGALRM
> > > > > +#  ifdef __MINGW32_MAJOR_VERSION
> > > > > +/* mingw.org's MinGW doesn't have 'alarm'.  */
> > > > > +unsigned int
> > > > > +alarm (unsigned int seconds)
> > > > > +{
> > > > > +  return 0;
> > > > > +}
> > > > > +#  endif
> > > > > #endif
> > > > >
> > > > > int rl_set_timeout (unsigned int, unsigned int);
> > > > 
> > > > I wonder why readline doesn't disable the whole stuff where alarm is used
> > > > on windows, since it doesn't work there anyways.
> > > 
> > > Chet said that's what he did, but I saw no evidence of that in the
> > > current Readline (assuming I was looking at the correct branch in the
> > > Git repository).  See
> > > 
> > >   https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-readline/2024-12/msg00003.html
> > 
> > Given what Chet says in
> > 
> >   https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-readline/2024-12/msg00006.html
> > 
> > I now understand how this is fixed in upstream Readline.  The fix
> > there is not right: it will fail the MinGW64 build.  So I'd like to
> > fix this properly in our repository and tell Chet how I recommend to
> > fix it upstream.
> > 
> > Should I fix this in our repository right away, or would you prefer to
> > wait for Chet to agree with my proposal, so that we have the same code
> > as in upstream Readline?
> 
> For the avoidance of doubt, I cannot approve patches in GDB anymore.
> 
> With that said, it's been fine in the past to first fix things
> locally in GDB, before coordinating with the upstream project
> as a second step. When the fix is pushed upstream, we can then
> resync our copy if the fix was different.

Thanks, I've now installed the change on both master and
gdb-16-branch.  Upon taking a better look on what the upstream
Readline did, I came to the conclusion that it does TRT for both
flavors of MinGW, so there's nothing to report to the Readline
developers.