This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH] Your patch from 20050512 b0rked on cygwin!
- From: Mark Kettenis <mark dot kettenis at xs4all dot nl>
- To: dave dot korn at artimi dot com
- Cc: mark dot kettenis at xs4all dot nl, gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 21:07:16 +0200 (CEST)
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Your patch from 20050512 b0rked on cygwin!
- References: <SERRANO0MTavL7tofgt000000d1@SERRANO.CAM.ARTIMI.COM>
> From: "Dave Korn" <dave.korn@artimi.com>
> Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 17:39:05 +0100
>
> [Please keep me in the Cc: line, as I don't subscribe to gdb-patches]
>
> Hi Mark,
>
> Your patch to unconditionally include shared library code:
>
> Original patch -
> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2005-05/msg00043.html
> Respin that went in -
> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2005-05/msg00198.html
>
> ... appears to have borked cygwin. No criticism of yourself should be read
> into this fact: you did appeal for cygwin testing, and nobody stepped up to
> the plate, so I'm as much to mea culpa as anybody.
Sorry 'bout that.
> Anyway, the problem is that win32-nat.c implements its own versions of the
> solib functions, and since your change, there is now a namespace clash over
> solib_address. I don't know if this is directly because of your patch, or
> some indirect knock-on from multi-arch work that has been ongoing; I think
> it is probably just because solib.o is in the COMMON_OBS now, but I haven't
> actually checked out and built an earlier cvs version to confirm my theory.
No need to check that out. We need to concentrate on getting this
fixed ;-).
> The attached patch fixes the problem, at any rate for me. However:
>
> a) I haven't done before-and-after testsuite runs yet, because of course
> there was no way to build a 'before' version recently.
No problem.
> b) It may or may not impact MinGW. I don't use MinGW and don't have an
> install or setup; I don't even know if MinGW can be a native gdb target,
> although I have this vague memory of having read posts here that say it
> doesn't currently support gdb, and I couldn't find it mentioned in
> src/gdb/config/i386/*. So this might or might not be an issue.
Currently you can only use a MinGW gdb created from official sources
to debug remote targets. So MinGW isn't an issue here.
> c) I changed a whole bunch of function names that didn't clash. I find this
> nice and consistent, but others may feel differently about
> aesthetically-pleasing but non-essential changes being applied.
I like consistency ;-).
> So I would appreciate a bit of review (and preferably from someone who
> knows better than me what's going on in this corner of the world!).
Ideally, the cygwin shared library code would be converted to use the
solib.c mechanism. However, that's a bit more work, so I can image
we'd want this "quick" fix in first. But Chris Faylor is the
maintainer of this code, so you'll need his approval.
Mark