This is the mail archive of the gdb@sourceware.cygnus.com mailing list for the GDB project. See the GDB home page for more information.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Hello, [Stan, JimB, as chief maintainer and GDB 4.18 people see end] rodneybrown@pmsc.com wrote: > /opt/ansic/bin/cc: # hppa2.0-hp-hpux10.20 > HP92453-01 G.10.32.05 HP C Compiler > > cc -Ae -c -g -D__HP_CURSES \ > -I. -I../../gdb-4.17.85/gdb -I../../gdb-4.17.85/gdb/config \ > -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I../../gdb-4.17.85/gdb/../include/opcode \ > -I../../gdb-4.17.85/gdb/../readline/.. -I../bfd \ > -I../../gdb-4.17.85/gdb/../bfd -I../../gdb-4.17.85/gdb/../include \ > -I../intl -I../../gdb-4.17.85/gdb/../intl -I../../gdb-4.17.85/gdb/tui \ > ../../gdb-4.17.85/gdb/remote.c [...] > cc: "../../gdb-4.17.85/gdb/remote.c", line 693: \ > error 1711: Inconsistent parameter list declaration for "pack_hex_byte". This one puzzles me. Looking in remote.c I see: static char *pack_hex_byte PARAMS ((char *pkt, unsigned char byte)); and then: static char * pack_hex_byte (pkt, byte) char *pkt; unsigned char byte; { Is this error because HP's compiler doesn't like the `unsigned char' parameter.? > cc: "../../gdb-4.17.85/gdb/remote.c", line 3046: \ > error 1711: Inconsistent parameter list declaration for "remote_query". > static int remote_query PARAMS ((char, char *, char *, int *)); and: static int remote_query (query_type, buf, outbuf, bufsiz) char query_type; char *buf; char *outbuf; int *bufsiz; This time I've no idea's as to what HP's ansic doesn't like about it. Any suggestions? Assuming that HP's compiler reporting errors because it has problems with prototyped and non-prototyped code, I can see two solutions: disable PARAMS for that host/compiler combination; make those problem functions part of the ANSI experiment? Stan, JimB, thoughts? Andrew PS: W.R.T. the other warnings, a glance over them suggests that, while it would be nice to clean them up, it isn't something to attempt in the GDB-4.18 time frame. Having 4.19 compile cleanly on on a select list of hosts, however, is certainly an achievable goal.