Konstantinos Margaritis wrote:
Does anyone know what the impact of renaming these to use a REG_ prefix like i386, amd64 and sparc do* would be? at worst the packages that had to be workaround on arm* for this, can
have the workaround removed.
I have prepared a patch (attatched) that eliminates the dependency on sys/procfs.h and renames R? to REG_R?. I have tested it by modifying the header locally. I am now attempting to rebuild glibc with the patch. After rebuilding glibc I will install it and attempt to rebuild GDB.
Please comment on the patch and advise on the best route for submission (that is should I go through debian, through eglibc or direct to glibc?)
Since you're in the process of fixing things for glibc/arm
Note that I am not a glibc developer nor am I a dd (and even if I was a dd I don't think I would NMU glibc). I'm just a user with an interest in the future of debian on arm.
would you mind also looking at WCHAR_MIN/MAX undefined for arm?
They most certainly are defined. The trouble is that WCHAR_MAX is defined in a strange way.
#define __WCHAR_MAX ( (wchar_t) - 1 )
This definition is fine for normal c or c++ code but it cannot be properly evaluated in the context of a preprocessor conditional.
The bug report has a patch (actually a replacement for an existing patch) which looks fine to me.