This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [Patch]: libbacktrace - add support of PE/COFF
- From: Tristan Gingold <gingold at adacore dot com>
- To: Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>
- Cc: GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 10:43:51 +0200
- Subject: Re: [Patch]: libbacktrace - add support of PE/COFF
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <2DD28AFE-AAB7-4B92-9ED0-A0F5763923CC at adacore dot com> <5565C843 dot 6080807 at redhat dot com> <CAKOQZ8yzKKeBYCX1Hb_8kNt5xp57CdWtO-OsnzRz=17piW6Rkg at mail dot gmail dot com> <2A1320CA-B855-4112-B4DD-2D6644D51C5E at adacore dot com> <CAKOQZ8xk50=vTyWb8SRK3sSK9V2x7BEdC4=Udf2uvUVhwcUpAA at mail dot gmail dot com>
> On 28 May 2015, at 17:14, Ian Lance Taylor <iant@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 5:01 AM, Tristan Gingold <gingold@adacore.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 28 May 2015, at 02:26, Ian Lance Taylor <iant@google.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The #include <windows.h> will break cross-compilers. It's not OK for
>>> trunk until that is fixed.
>>
>> I am confused by this comment, for two reasons:
>>
>> - I donât see how that would break cross-compilers. Cross compilers
>> hosted on windows are not impacted by this include when the library is
>> used for the tools. When then backtrace library is used for the target,
>> pecoff is not used unless the target is windows.
>> So I donât see a case where the include breaks cross-compilers.
>
> The way you have written the code, I'm fairly sure that it will be
> compiled for an i386-coff target.
And the only coff target supported is djgpp, right ?
>> - If the case exists, I donât see how to implement backtrace within
>> shared libraries: I need a windows specific function to get the list
>> of DLL.
>
> I would be OK with a #include <windows.h> that is conditional on
> something that indicates that the host (from the point of view of
> libbacktrace) really is Windows.
Is it ok to test if the _WIN32 macro is defined (like in libiberty) ?
> The new version of the patch is OK.
Thanks, now committed.
Tristan.