From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8766 invoked by alias); 23 Jun 2005 05:39:20 -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 7979 invoked by uid 22791); 23 Jun 2005 05:39:14 -0000 Received: from wproxy.gmail.com (HELO wproxy.gmail.com) (64.233.184.197) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Thu, 23 Jun 2005 05:39:14 +0000 Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 69so304715wri for ; Wed, 22 Jun 2005 22:39:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.54.53.39 with SMTP id b39mr915682wra; Wed, 22 Jun 2005 22:39:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.54.42.75 with HTTP; Wed, 22 Jun 2005 22:39:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 05:39:00 -0000 From: Chad Harrington Reply-To: Chad Harrington To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: typo in gdb/gdb_ptrace.c Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline X-SW-Source: 2005-06/txt/msg00356.txt.bz2 Below is the diff patch for my fix. It is not critical, but it sure looks like a mistake to me. This was in gdb-6.3, as you can see. The preprocessor is told to define PT_ATTACH if PTRACE_DETACH is defined.=20 I think it should only define PT_ATTACH if PTRACE_ATTACH is defined, but I think they'd both be defined if one or the other is already defined anyway... It merely appears to be a typo. :-) I hope this helps. -=3DChad chad@CRPC02:~$ cat gdb-6.3/gdb.diff --- old/gdb/gdb_ptrace.h 2005-06-22 23:12:52.000000000 -0600 +++ new/gdb/gdb_ptrace.h 2005-06-22 23:13:57.000000000 -0600 @@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ /* Not all systems support attaching and detaching. */ =20 #ifndef PT_ATTCH -# ifdef PTRACE_DETACH +# ifdef PTRACE_ATTACH # define PT_ATTACH PTRACE_ATTACH # endif #endif