This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [RFA] fix for utils.c bool problem

From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at cygnus dot com>
To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>
Cc: gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com,"Martin M. Hunt" <hunt at redhat dot com>
Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2002 11:51:10 -0500
Subject: Re: [RFA] fix for utils.c bool problem
References: <200202072133.NAA28346@cygnus.com> <20020207163944.A30605@nevyn.them.org> <20020208105750.A16802@nevyn.them.org>

> This is the patch I alluded to earlier today on binutils@.  It's not
>> quite complete, since TUI is also affected; I've attached mine.  I'm
>> quite surprised that this fixes the problem for you without the
>> corresponding bfd patch that I haven't committed yet!
> 
> 
> No one objected, so I've committed this.  As far as I know GDB should
> build everywhere it used to before I started playing with bool, as long
> as you update both BFD and GDB.  If I'm wrong, please let me know.


Dan I couldn't see the point of the patch.   The immediate problem - 
bfd.h including <stdbool.h> was fixed.  The next step, I thought, was 
fix bfd.h.  It isn't hurting in a major way and definitly breaks GDB's 
coding style.

Andrew

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [RFA] fix for utils.c bool problem
  - From: Daniel Jacobowitz

References:
- [RFA] fix for utils.c bool problem
  - From: Martin M. Hunt
- Re: [RFA] fix for utils.c bool problem
  - From: Daniel Jacobowitz
- Re: [RFA] fix for utils.c bool problem
  - From: Daniel Jacobowitz

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]