This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH 1/1] Add debuginfod support to GDB
- From: Aaron Merey <amerey at redhat dot com>
- To: Christian Biesinger <cbiesinger at google dot com>
- Cc: Tom Tromey <tom at tromey dot com>, gdb-patches <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2020 11:31:50 -0500
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] Add debuginfod support to GDB
- References: <CAJDtP-RzP1byHayyOcXeFjucf65mAt4bi9T28nC9zfJ_-0Md3w@mail.gmail.com> <87h814r6p4.fsf@tromey.com> <CAJDtP-Qz2bWFf5y775Pz8f=Dw5kCtcPqGUkoiZf8F9PsxW0z0Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAPTJ0XHYb_WL_Tb479sbqN1Vz0VAGLbPA44hP855t=4h5c9nfw@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 6:28 PM Christian Biesinger
<cbiesinger@google.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 4:41 PM Aaron Merey <amerey@redhat.com> wrote:
> > The reason for the top-level AC_DEBUGINFOD is to prevent the top-level
> > configure check from succeeding in cases where --with-debuginfod is
> > given but the debuginfod library or header cannot be found.
>
> Why is debuginfo special in that way? There are a lot of other
> libraries in the same situation.
It was recommended to me on binutils@ that the top-level configure check
should fail if --with-debuginfod is given but not installed.
https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2019-11/msg00371.html
Despite that I can remove the top-level AC_DEBUGINFOD to match the
behavior of other configure options.
> Now that GDB is C++, I'd move the declarations to where the variables
> are used, e.g.:
> debuginfod_client *client = debuginfod_begin ();
>
> + if (client != NULL)
>
> nullptr
>
> +++ b/gdb/elfread.c
>
> same here
Ok.
> Don't you also need to update gdb/README (the `configure' options
> section) and doc/gdb.texinfo (@node Configure Options)?
gdb.texinfo was updated in this patch but not README, will fix that.
Aaron