[PATCH v3 16/18] BFD: Add BFD pointer member to archive member references

[Maciej W. Rozycki]

On Tue, 13 Jan 2026, Jan Beulich wrote:

> >>> --- binutils-gdb.orig/binutils/bucomm.c
> >>> +++ binutils-gdb/binutils/bucomm.c
> >>> @@ -477,10 +477,12 @@ print_arelt_descr (FILE *file, bfd *abfd
> >>>  
> >>>    if (offsets)
> >>>      {
> >>> -      if (bfd_is_thin_archive (abfd) && abfd->proxy_origin)
> >>> -        fprintf (file, " 0x%lx", (unsigned long) abfd->proxy_origin);
> >>> +      if (bfd_is_thin_archive (abfd) && abfd->proxy_handle.file_offset)
> >>> +	fprintf (file, " 0x%lx",
> >>> +		 (unsigned long) abfd->proxy_handle.file_offset);
> >>>        else if (!bfd_is_thin_archive (abfd) && abfd->origin)
> >>> -        fprintf (file, " 0x%lx", (unsigned long) abfd->origin);
> >>> +	fprintf (file, " 0x%lx",
> >>> +		 (unsigned long) abfd->origin);
> >>
> >> Aiui you correct indentation here.
> > 
> >  Umm, no, the format specifier's corresponding argument has changed for 
> > each `fprintf' invocation.  The new code has to conform to the GNU Coding 
> > Standards of course, so broken indentation is naturally not preserved.
> 
> How is "(unsigned long) abfd->origin" different from
> "(unsigned long) abfd->origin"?

 My bad, only the first `fprintf' invocation is actually changed and with 
the second it's pure white-space juggling.  I'll drop the second change 
then.

  Maciej