From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9811 invoked by alias); 20 May 2008 03:55:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 9802 invoked by uid 22791); 20 May 2008 03:55:37 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from ti-out-0910.google.com (HELO ti-out-0910.google.com) (209.85.142.188) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 20 May 2008 03:55:20 +0000 Received: by ti-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id d10so1072179tib.12 for ; Mon, 19 May 2008 20:55:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.110.70.5 with SMTP id s5mr1018598tia.27.1211255717629; Mon, 19 May 2008 20:55:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.110.105.20 with HTTP; Mon, 19 May 2008 20:55:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 15:32:00 -0000 From: Tea To: drow@false.org, "Thiago Jung Bauermann" , Tea , "Michael Snyder" , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: GDB record patch 0.1.3.1 for GDB-6.8 release In-Reply-To: <20080519212903.GA869@caradoc.them.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <1211231955.32587.23.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080519212903.GA869@caradoc.them.org> X-IsSubscribed: yes 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 X-SW-Source: 2008-05/txt/msg00589.txt.bz2 Agree with Daniel. I think current way is better than include Linux kernel header files. To compile GDB with Linux KERNEL? I think it will make compile GDB not very easy. If the Linux Kernel change. The user need re-compile the GDB? Or add Linux Kernel files to GDB directory? It looks not very professional. And maybe will cause some copyright problem. And this types size will not change very continually. The GLIBC use it too. The kernel more like add new types than change the old types. Of course, add more comments for these size #define are needed. It is a big job for me. It make me crazy in before. :) Thanks, teawater On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 5:29 AM, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 06:19:15PM -0300, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: > > I wonder if there is a way to get these sizes by including the Linux > > kernel header files? The way it is done here looks very fragile and tied > > to a specific Linux kernel version to me... > > > > Granted, using kernel includes will still be fragile and > > version-specific, but at least to update GDB only a recompile is needed, > > as oposed to manually figuring out and editing these #defines. > > No, this way is better. These are not types used internally by the > kernel; they're part of its public interface and will not change. > And the headers are in good shape nowadays but the clean headers are > not universally available yet. > > > -- > Daniel Jacobowitz > CodeSourcery