This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: PATCH: Fix bfd.c (Re: Tracking down a build breakage)
- To: Kazu Hirata <kazu at hxi dot com>
- Subject: Re: PATCH: Fix bfd.c (Re: Tracking down a build breakage)
- From: "H . J . Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>
- Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2001 11:17:45 -0700
- Cc: binutils at sources dot redhat dot com
- References: <E15VdGK-0005QG-00@fencepost.gnu.org>
On Sat, Aug 11, 2001 at 02:13:28PM -0400, Kazu Hirata wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > But my bfd_sprintf_vma/bfd_fprintf_vma change does break any BFD
> > which doesn't include elf.lo. It seems to me that we should only
> > check bfd_target_elf_flavour when elf is configured in BFD. Here
> > is a patch. Any comments?
>
> This seemd to be a problem when I was trying to build gdb.
>
> > 2001-08-11 H.J. Lu <hjl@gnu.org>
> >
> > * Makefile.am (BFD_DEFINES): New. Substituted by @bfd_defines@.
> > (INCLUDES): Add $(BFD_DEFINES).
> > * Makefile.in: Regenerated.
> >
> > * configure.in (bfd_defines): Add -DHAVE_BFD_ELF if elf.lo
> > is in $bfd_backend.
> > (AC_SUBST(bfd_defines)): Added.
> > * configure: Regenerated.
> >
> > * bfd.c (bfd_sprintf_vma): Check ELF only if HAVE_BFD_ELF is
> > defined.
> > (bfd_fprintf_vma): Likewise.
>
> Amazingly, after doing "cvs co binutils", I did not have to apply your
> patch to successfully build h8300 target. With your patch, the build
> process got stuck as follows. The command line looks just fine. I
> don't know why gcc makes such a complaint...
I didn't include the patch for bfd/configure. Do
# cd ..../bfd
# autoconf
H.J.