This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH] Fix PR bootstrap/42798
- From: Ralf Wildenhues <Ralf dot Wildenhues at gmx dot de>
- To: Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>
- Cc: Paolo Bonzini <bonzini at gnu dot org>, binutils at sourceware dot org, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2010 13:28:33 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix PR bootstrap/42798
- References: <20100601204405.GA1170@gmx.de> <AANLkTim4-8VpK907cHTIcT2ELeZEgOBpLf0FUJmpPCJN@mail.gmail.com> <20100602111845.GA16161@ins.uni-bonn.de> <4C064B77.firstname.lastname@example.org> <20100603063319.GC28276@gmx.de> <20100603065852.GA28617@gmx.de> <email@example.com>
* Ian Lance Taylor wrote on Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 04:59:01PM CEST:
> Ralf Wildenhues <Ralf.Wildenhues@gmx.de> writes:
> > This is the followup patch for src. Tested by building binutils+gdb,
> > I'm starting a combined tree with --enable-build-with-cxx now.
> > Ok to commit if no problems show up?
> > A note to the gold change: I've looked at git glibc headers, of the
> > declarations tested only 'basename' was overloaded. If more are added
> > in the future, the configure.ac files need to be adjusted to give
> > parameters for them, too. This applies to the whole tree of course for
> > --enable-build-with-cxx, not just for gold.
> With regard to the gold change. What will happen if the system header
> files provide only a declaration
> char *basename(const char *)
> Since gold doesn't actually basename, another option here would be to
> skip the check of the basename declaration entirely. In fact, we
> should consider dropping basename from libiberty; our code should in
> general use lbasename anyhow.
Well, these are two additional changes on top of the one I posted though
and can easily be addressed in the future. Meanwhile, a combined build
with maintainer-mode enabled will cause spurious changes to generated
files, and the patch is pretty minimal in that it fixes the issues but
doesn't change semantics otherwise. So, ok to commit to src?