From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17106 invoked by alias); 15 Apr 2002 17:11:41 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 17066 invoked from network); 15 Apr 2002 17:11:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (128.2.145.6) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 15 Apr 2002 17:11:38 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 16xA0V-00063I-00; Mon, 15 Apr 2002 13:11:11 -0400 Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 10:11:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Dr=2E_Jochen_R=F6hrig?= Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com, msnyder@redhat.com Subject: Re: S/390 Linux doesn't link on trunk Message-ID: <20020415131111.A23109@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Dr=2E_Jochen_R=F6hrig?= , gdb@sources.redhat.com, msnyder@redhat.com References: <20020407173859.A31836@nevyn.them.org> <02041519022500.02708@kontiki> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <02041519022500.02708@kontiki> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23i X-SW-Source: 2002-04/txt/msg00256.txt.bz2 On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 07:02:25PM +0200, Dr. Jochen Röhrig wrote: > The problem arises from the unconditional definition of > CHILD_PID_TO_EXEC_FILE at the end of config/nm-linux.h. According to the > CVS-log this was added in Revision 1.11 of config/nm-linux.h on January, 8th. > There were also changes made in config//linux.mh for some architectures > (linking with linux-proc.o), which, as far as I can judge it, avoid the above > described problem on theses architectures. However s390 (and, as it seems, > some other architectures), doesn't have a config//linux.mh so no > modifications were made for s390. > > My question now: are we missing something for s390 because we don't have the > config/s390/linux.mh-file or are the changes to config/s390/nm-linux.h that I > described above a correct solution for the problem? Or would it instead be a > better solution to add a "NATDEPFILES += linux-proc.o" to config/s390/s390.mh? Aha! That's a good solution. A better one is to kill config/s390/s390.mh, create config/s390/linux.mh, and use that instead. That's much more accurate and will help prevent this sort of error recurring. Michael, sound right to you? I can't think of any reason not to use linux-proc.o on S/390. -- Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer