[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2017 11:31:27 +0200
From: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com>
To: mzpqnxow <musl@...qnxow.com>
Cc: musl@...ts.openwall.com, Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
Subject: Re: Issues building gdbserver with musl
Hello,
On Sat, 3 Jun 2017 18:50:59 -0400, mzpqnxow wrote:
> FWIW, the following is the patch I came up with for PPC- it was very, very
> short:
>
> diff -Naur gdb-7.12/gdb/gdbserver/linux-ppc-low.c
> gdb-7.12-ppc-patched/gdb/gdbserver/linux-ppc-low.c
> --- gdb-7.12/gdb/gdbserver/linux-ppc-low.c 2016-08-01 11:50:20.000000000
> -0400
> +++ gdb-7.12-ppc-patched/gdb/gdbserver/linux-ppc-low.c 2017-05-15
> 13:40:22.073884258 -0400
> @@ -21,7 +21,9 @@
> #include "linux-low.h"
>
> #include <elf.h>
> +#define __ASSEMBLY__
> #include <asm/ptrace.h>
> +#undef __ASSEMBLY__
Can we upstream something like this? What is the explanation why musl
needs such a patch and not glibc/uclibc?
Thanks,
Thomas
--
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://free-electrons.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
