This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFA] Fix compilation failure in hpux-thread.c under HPUX 11.00
- To: Joel Brobecker <brobecker at act-europe dot fr>
- Subject: Re: [RFA] Fix compilation failure in hpux-thread.c under HPUX 11.00
- From: Kevin Buettner <kevinb at cygnus dot com>
- Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2001 11:39:41 -0700
- Cc: gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- References: <20010927155347.F21075@act-europe.fr> <brobecker@act-europe.fr> <1010927170437.ZM4452@ocotillo.lan> <20010928233120.A24896@act-europe.fr>
On Sep 28, 11:31pm, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> As a side note, I tried to run the GDB I obtained and did not have
> much luck. Setting breakpoints seems ok, although I haven't double
> checked the pc addresses. However, when I try to run, GDB prints
> "Starting program ..." and then just sits there. The inferior is never
> spawned but I get 2 gdb processes for the price of one. I haven't had
> time to investigate more, and I'm not sure if this is because of my
> changes or not.
FWIW, I think this has been a problem for quite some time. I did
actually try to build/run on HPUX at the time I was working on the
initial ptid_t changes (over a year ago now) and HPUX didn't work
then either. It'd be really nice if someone would volunteer to be
the HPUX maintainer.
> Anyway, I'm attaching the patch, awaiting your comments. There is one
> static variable that was probably intended to be used as a cache. It was
> never assigned a value, so I deleted it for now. I could submit this
> obvious change as a separate patch if necessary.
I have no problem with this change being rolled into your present
patch.
> 2001-09-28 J. Brobecker <brobecker@gnat.com>
>
> * hpux-thread.c: rewrite find_active_thread() and find_tcb()
> to use ptid_t, instead of overloading the thread and the pid
> into the same 32-bit value. Make associated necessary adaptations.
> Also remove unused variable cached_active_thread.
I've reviewed your patch and it looks right to me. Since HPUX doesn't
have a maintainer, and you're fixing build problems, I think it's okay
for you to commit your changes. (I think this is as close to saying
"Approved" as I can get without being the actual maintainer of the
code.)
Thanks,
Kevin