Re: typo in gdb/gdb_ptrace.c

[Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de>]

Chad Harrington <harrington.chad@gmail.com> writes:

> 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. 
> 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. :-)

There is another typo in the previous line.  I've checked this in as
obvious.

2005-06-23  Andreas Schwab  <schwab@suse.de>

	* gdb_ptrace.h: Fix typos when checking for PT_ATTACH.  Reported
	by Chad Harrington <harrington.chad@gmail.com>.

--- gdb/gdb_ptrace.h.~1.3.~	2004-11-22 13:57:48.000000000 +0100
+++ gdb/gdb_ptrace.h	2005-06-23 11:02:57.000000000 +0200
@@ -92,8 +92,8 @@
 
 /* Not all systems support attaching and detaching.   */
 
-#ifndef PT_ATTCH
-# ifdef PTRACE_DETACH
+#ifndef PT_ATTACH
+# ifdef PTRACE_ATTACH
 #  define PT_ATTACH PTRACE_ATTACH
 # endif
 #endif

Andreas.

-- 
Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, schwab@suse.de
SuSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756  01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."