This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [commit] gdb_byte part of ppc
- From: Manoj Iyer <manjo at austin dot ibm dot com>
- To: Andrew Cagney <cagney at gnu dot org>
- Cc: "M.M. Kettenis" <m dot m dot kettenis at alumnus dot utwente dot nl>, gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 10:02:19 -0500 (CDT)
- Subject: Re: [commit] gdb_byte part of ppc
- References: <7320911886087069@webhare> <429476B0.3010506@gnu.org>
I send out a similar patch for review yestarday and it covers a few more
files, any comments on that one? Would you like a similar patch for
sim/ppc files?
-----
manjo
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+ Cogito ergo sum +
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
On Wed, 25 May 2005, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> M.M. Kettenis wrote:
> > Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org> wrote:
> >
> >> these files, for the moment, get past gcc4
> >
> >
> > Great! Have you been able to test i386 with gcc4 lately?
>
> You can try. However, let me rephrase the above:
>
> These files, along with a few others, do get past gcc4 -Werror. Many
> don't, gdb_byte being just one problem. gcc4 -Werror continues to be
> pretty much useless.
>
> > I think I've
> > done most of the conversion, but I haven't been able to install gcc4 on
> > my systems yet, and I won't be able to do so until I'm back home.
> >
> > Anyway, I've seen a lot of breakage from -Werror lately. I really think
> > we should make that the default, at least for cvs version, after we've
> > fixed all the gdb_byte fallout. Otherwise this will never be fixed
> > proberly.
>
> Like binutils? Sounds like something for gdb@
>