Re: [Crash-utility] [PATCH] Fix C99 compatibility issues in embedded copy of GDB

Monday, 20 February 2023


On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 5:40 PM Florian Weimer <fweimer(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:

...
 > BTW: Could you please follow the current styles of
gdb-10.2patch?
 > +diff --git gdb-10.2.orig/bfd/elf-bfd.h gdb-10.2/bfd/elf-bfd.h
 > +index eebdf9a..775d96c 100644
 > +--- gdb-10.2.orig/bfd/elf-bfd.h
 > ++++ gdb-10.2/bfd/elf-bfd.h
 > Usually, the above styles are not recommended.

 What exactly don't you like about it?  It's just regular git diff output
 with different prefixes.
 
Sorry about it, Florian. I should provide an example to describe more
details as below:
...

+	gdb-10.2/readline/readline/configure.ac \

 exit 0

@@ -2078,3 +2085,1013 @@ exit 0

    return new_type;
  }+diff --git gdb-10.2.orig/bfd/elf-bfd.h gdb-10.2/bfd/elf-bfd.h  --->remove
+index eebdf9a..775d96c 100644
--->remove+--- gdb-10.2.orig/bfd/elf-bfd.h  --->change to
gdb-10.2/bfd/elf-bfd.h.orig
++++ gdb-10.2/bfd/elf-bfd.h
+@@ -27,6 +27,8 @@
+ #include "elf/internal.h"
+ #include "bfdlink.h"
+
++#include <string.h>
++

...

The above styles are currently recommended and can be consistent with the
current gdb-10.2.patch.

Hope this helps.

Thanks.
Lianbo


...
 Thanks,
 Florian

 
    