This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Fix doc index name on Windows


Eli Zaretskii wrote:
From: Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2010 12:03:05 +0000
Cc: Jonathan Larmour <jifl@ecoscentric.com>

On Friday 26 November 2010 11:57:47, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

Then it's a bug in the cross-build version of makeinfo.  There's code
in makeinfo/node.c:cm_node to handle the case when a file name
produced from a node name clashes with a name of an existing file
(produced from some other node name), due to limitations of the
underlying filesystem.  What makeinfo does in that case is put all the
nodes whose names map to the same file name on that single file.  I
see this behavior in action in the Windows port of makeinfo 4.8, and
the code which does this was written long before Texinfo 4.7 was
released, so you must have it as well.

If such code is only triggerable on some hosts only, then IMO it is broken, because the resulting files will not be movable between hosts (e.g., generate on Unix, unpack on Windows/NTFS/FAT/Samba, whatnot).


IMO, "broken" is an exaggeration.  How many tools did you see that
care about having their files produced on Unix be compatible with
NTFS?  How many maintainers of GNU packages do you know who would even
consider a possibility of inserting NTFS-related limitations into
their codebase?

Evidently quite a few because my patch just brings GDB into line with what GAS, binutils, BFD, CPP, and LD's docs explicitly do. In this respect GDB is the odd one out.


Usually, such problems are at best fixed for the hosts that use the
affected filesystems.  And the cross-build environments should take
care of these issues, because they _do_ (or should) care.

People don't use a special cross version of makeinfo. GDB doesn't try and invoke one, for example. Which is quite right. I don't think people would be keen if I submitted a patch requiring cross builders to have provided e.g. arm-eabi-makeinfo.


Is there a way to force that behaviour with a makeinfo command line
switch or something of the sort?


Not that I know of.  No one has ever asked for that, AFAIK.  But it
should be trivial to add such a switch, now that I pointed to the code
which does that.

I don't think it's good to make GDB dependent on a version of makeinfo which does not yet exist.


Jifl
--
eCosCentric Limited      http://www.eCosCentric.com/     The eCos experts
Barnwell House, Barnwell Drive, Cambridge, UK.       Tel: +44 1223 245571
Registered in England and Wales: Reg No 4422071.
------["Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere"]------       Opinions==mine


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]