From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from omta39.uswest2.a.cloudfilter.net (omta39.uswest2.a.cloudfilter.net [35.89.44.38]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE7253858D28 for ; Tue, 22 Aug 2023 18:12:37 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org DE7253858D28 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=tromey.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=tromey.com Received: from eig-obgw-5009a.ext.cloudfilter.net ([10.0.29.176]) by cmsmtp with ESMTP id YRcJqw7M5bK1VYVroqZrrO; Tue, 22 Aug 2023 18:12:37 +0000 Received: from box5379.bluehost.com ([162.241.216.53]) by cmsmtp with ESMTPS id YVrnqkfFRW18CYVroqxZlf; Tue, 22 Aug 2023 18:12:36 +0000 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=SpqDVdC0 c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=64e4fa94 a=ApxJNpeYhEAb1aAlGBBbmA==:117 a=ApxJNpeYhEAb1aAlGBBbmA==:17 a=OWjo9vPv0XrRhIrVQ50Ab3nP57M=:19 a=dLZJa+xiwSxG16/P+YVxDGlgEgI=:19 a=UttIx32zK-AA:10 a=Qbun_eYptAEA:10 a=CCpqsmhAAAAA:8 a=75FAf6A6GYzAqeeAwkAA:9 a=ul9cdbp4aOFLsgKbc677:22 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tromey.com; s=default; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date:References :Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=wnij+5oSnFJhalxc6nFw/1ZsJfrArCGt7va5AijnyT4=; b=jgWs4cP7AcWuclrha40Et0drnc 9hoJZ57DhD5NEzQ8vYK1ZrQaK6oNNh1KJJFKJLBVBDVmGDf16JRg0f7Tk+kPgPcYeqMCripcIaD4W xZR6TKGBMRfMZPuW3r2ITkeqc; Received: from 75-166-142-177.hlrn.qwest.net ([75.166.142.177]:46904 helo=murgatroyd) by box5379.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1qYTiT-003qtm-1r; Tue, 22 Aug 2023 09:54:49 -0600 From: Tom Tromey To: Tom de Vries via Gdb-patches Cc: Tom Tromey , Tom de Vries Subject: Re: [PATCH] [gdb/build] Work around cgen odr violations References: <20230818083857.15960-1-tdevries@suse.de> <877cpsxsiu.fsf@tromey.com> X-Attribution: Tom Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2023 09:54:48 -0600 In-Reply-To: (Tom de Vries via Gdb-patches's message of "Mon, 21 Aug 2023 08:05:51 +0200") Message-ID: <87y1i3ul6f.fsf@tromey.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - box5379.bluehost.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - sourceware.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - tromey.com X-BWhitelist: no X-Source-IP: 75.166.142.177 X-Source-L: No X-Exim-ID: 1qYTiT-003qtm-1r X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Source-Sender: 75-166-142-177.hlrn.qwest.net (murgatroyd) [75.166.142.177]:46904 X-Source-Auth: tom+tromey.com X-Email-Count: 0 X-Org: HG=bhshared;ORG=bluehost; X-Source-Cap: ZWx5bnJvYmk7ZWx5bnJvYmk7Ym94NTM3OS5ibHVlaG9zdC5jb20= X-Local-Domain: yes X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4xfAUEyRe6qqz/6Bk4KS7FDn3e+QwUrO2cg92Mky1iGZaGFYmHkbfgAxO/DxBXuKohrn/kInhck7P8zfyGFgXFBlbHriH2sw4GnADPfju84oCfSeFUn+BO +wj3g8Zo2E9L7vWeSzCJvsuOhdWvYMAAeUc38ewmruOrAjHkg/4GZppBVydATZePtgvaxrx7wl6Q9C4z7BjcnHjKYN/eqv2P27s= X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3019.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: >>>>> "Tom" == Tom de Vries via Gdb-patches writes: >> That was WONTFIX'd unfortunately. Tom> Yep, unfortunate indeed. Tom> FWIW, the rationale given there was about libopcodes being a C Tom> library, and I also briefly considered encapsulating the use of the Tom> *-desc.h files in a C file, and exporting a cgen-free interface from Tom> there, to be used in C++ files, but I found that there's no longer any Tom> real support for compiling C inside the gdb dir. I didn't look too deeply, but it seems to me that if the types in question are truly only used by libopcodes -- and never directly referred to by gdb -- then this would be a -Wodr bug. OTOH if the types have to be used by library users, then yeah, renaming is preferable by far. I don't know which is the case here though. Tom