From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7168 invoked by alias); 15 May 2013 11:24:20 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 7159 invoked by uid 89); 15 May 2013 11:24:19 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-4.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_NO,SPF_SOFTFAIL autolearn=no version=3.3.1 Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il (HELO mtaout22.012.net.il) (80.179.55.172) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Wed, 15 May 2013 11:24:17 +0000 Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0MMU00G007KUQ300@a-mtaout22.012.net.il> for gdb@sourceware.org; Wed, 15 May 2013 14:24:12 +0300 (IDT) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0MMU00GA17OCJ8F0@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Wed, 15 May 2013 14:24:12 +0300 (IDT) Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 11:24:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: Why gdb fail to make In-reply-to: <20130515111056.GI32170@adacore.com> To: Joel Brobecker Cc: hitlar.india@gmail.com, gdb@sourceware.org Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii Message-id: <83obcc5vvr.fsf@gnu.org> References: <1368615049967-231905.post@n7.nabble.com> <20130515111056.GI32170@adacore.com> X-SW-Source: 2013-05/txt/msg00063.txt.bz2 > Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 15:10:56 +0400 > From: Joel Brobecker > Cc: gdb@sourceware.org > > > In file included from ../../gdb-7.6.50-2/gdb/defs.h:803, > > from ../../gdb-7.6.50-2/gdb/gdb.c:19: > > ../../gdb-7.6.50-2/gdb/utils.h:283: warning: parameter has incomplete type > > Makefile:979: recipe for target `gdb.o' failed > > I think that's from the following declaration in utils.h: > > enum errors; Right. > This was reported recently, and we discovered that this type of > declaration was a GCC extension not supported by older versions > of GCC. > > I thought we had this fixed, already, but it looks like not. Sorry. > You can probably work-around the problem by adding > > #include "exceptions.h" > > around the start of utils.h. My understanding was that this is the solution, not a work-around.