From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17978 invoked by alias); 16 Jul 2010 15:36:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 17961 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Jul 2010 15:36:08 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 16 Jul 2010 15:35:59 +0000 Received: from int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.18]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o6GFZuXY002968 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 16 Jul 2010 11:35:56 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o6GFZtFt018020; Fri, 16 Jul 2010 11:35:55 -0400 Received: from opsy.redhat.com (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o6GFZtAT004403; Fri, 16 Jul 2010 11:35:55 -0400 Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id C7FB1378B5F; Fri, 16 Jul 2010 09:35:54 -0600 (MDT) From: Tom Tromey To: Ozkan Sezer Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix build failure for win64, revise some format strings References: Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 15:36:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: (Ozkan Sezer's message of "Thu, 15 Jul 2010 21:55:05 +0300") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 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: 2010-07/txt/msg00244.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Ozkan" == Ozkan Sezer writes: Ozkan> PING Ozkan> Can someone please review this patch? (Win64 fails to build for a week.) Sorry about that. I was hoping someone else would do this ;-) Thanks for pinging. I think it would be better to change those places to use host_address_to_string. E.g., change from: fprintf_unfiltered (gdb_stdlog, "target_insert_breakpoint (0x%lx, xxx) = %ld\n", (unsigned long) bp_tgt->placed_address, (unsigned long) retval); to fprintf_unfiltered (gdb_stdlog, "target_insert_breakpoint (%s, xxx) = %ld\n", host_address_to_string (bp_tgt->placed_address), (unsigned long) retval); This lets us avoid dealing with the gnulib changes, etc. Tom