https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25155
--- Comment #5 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> --- The gdb-9-branch branch has been updated by Joel Brobecker <brobe...@sourceware.org>: https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=50500ecfefd6acc4c7f6c2a95bc0ae1945103220 commit 50500ecfefd6acc4c7f6c2a95bc0ae1945103220 Author: Eli Zaretskii <e...@gnu.org> Date: Sat Feb 1 15:25:19 2020 +0400 libctf: compilation failure on MinGW due to missing errno values This commit fixes a compilation failure in a couple of libctf files due to the use of EOVERFLOW and ENOTSUP, which are not defined when compiling on MinGW. libctf/ChangeLog: PR binutils/25155: * ctf-create.c (EOVERFLOW): If not defined by system header, redirect to ERANGE as a poor man's substitute. * ctf-subr.c (ENOTSUP): If not defined, use ENOSYS instead. This one is how Eli implemented it. I think this implementation has a weakness in the following sense: If other units in libctf start using those constants, we'll get the same error again. Also, I'm wondering whether their use is documented as part of the official libtcf API or not -- users might be writing code that tests for these, and if the system doesn't support them, how would they know what errno code to use in its place. This argues for a having that information in one of libctf's header files. I think it would be nice to have those in ctf-decls.h, but I think we'll need to include <errno.h> in ctf-decls.h if we decide to define those macros there. Rather than second-guess what the CTF developers would prefer, I'm starting by sending Eli's patch, to see what you guys think. Thanks, -- Joel -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
