From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14421 invoked by alias); 27 Jun 2018 16:32:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 14408 invoked by uid 89); 27 Jun 2018 16:32:43 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx3-rdu2.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.73) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 16:32:42 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D7C67402B03F; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 16:32:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn04.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.4]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A8342026D5B; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 16:32:40 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH] nat/fork-inferior: include linux-ptrace.h To: Simon Marchi , Thomas Petazzoni References: <20180625080547.7629-1-thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com> <3acce11a3e5ed352af945ab71739468b@polymtl.ca> <20180627163123.6da3d93c@windsurf.home> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 16:32:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-SW-Source: 2018-06/txt/msg00659.txt.bz2 On 06/27/2018 03:34 PM, Simon Marchi wrote: > On 2018-06-27 10:31, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: >>> fork-inferior.c is also included in native builds for BSDs, AIX, Solaris >>> and Darwin (see gdb/configure.nat).  I am a bit concerned that >>> linux-ptrace.h could use some Linux-specific things, and thus would >>> break the other builds.  However, I built-tested on FreeBSD and it seems >>> fine.  Worst case, we can probably wrap this include in "#ifdef >>> __linux__" if that becomes a problem. >> >> Or better, this horrible mess of __UCLIBC__ and HAS_NOMMU macros should >> be replaced by a proper autoconf check testing for the availability of >> fork(). > > Agreed, and I think Pedro will agree too (unless you can think of a simpler solution that doesn't involve autoconf?). That does sound better. Thanks, Pedro Alves