* [PATCH] Remove sh-hms target
@ 2002-05-13 16:25 Elena Zannoni
2002-05-13 21:27 ` Alexandre Oliva
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Elena Zannoni @ 2002-05-13 16:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-patches
The sh-hms target wasn't really doing anything different from sh-elf for what
gdb was concerned. It built exactly the same set of files.
Elena
2002-05-13 Elena Zannoni <ezannoni@redhat.com>
* configure.tgt: Remove sh-hms target.
* MAINTAINERS: Don't list sh-hms as a separate target.
Index: MAINTAINERS
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/uberbaum/gdb/MAINTAINERS,v
retrieving revision 1.172
diff -u -p -r1.172 MAINTAINERS
--- MAINTAINERS 11 May 2002 14:18:14 -0000 1.172
+++ MAINTAINERS 13 May 2002 23:22:07 -0000
@@ -154,7 +154,7 @@ maintainer works with the native maintai
s390 --target=s390-linux ,-Werror
(contact DJ Barrow djbarrow@de.ibm.com)
- sh --target=sh-hms,sh-elf -w
+ sh --target=sh-elf -w
Elena Zannoni ezannoni@redhat.com
sparc --target=sparc-elf,sparc64-elf ,-Werror
Index: configure.tgt
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/uberbaum/gdb/configure.tgt,v
retrieving revision 1.62
diff -u -p -r1.62 configure.tgt
--- configure.tgt 12 May 2002 15:07:41 -0000 1.62
+++ configure.tgt 13 May 2002 23:22:24 -0000
@@ -245,7 +245,6 @@ s390x-*-*) gdb_target=s390x
;;
sh*-*-pe) gdb_target=wince ;;
-sh-*-hms) gdb_target=embed ;;
sh-*-coff*) gdb_target=embed ;;
sh-*-elf*) gdb_target=embed ;;
sh-*-linux*) gdb_target=linux
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] Remove sh-hms target
2002-05-13 16:25 [PATCH] Remove sh-hms target Elena Zannoni
@ 2002-05-13 21:27 ` Alexandre Oliva
2002-05-14 6:54 ` Elena Zannoni
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Alexandre Oliva @ 2002-05-13 21:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Elena Zannoni; +Cc: gdb-patches
On May 13, 2002, Elena Zannoni <ezannoni@redhat.com> wrote:
> The sh-hms target wasn't really doing anything different from sh-elf
> for what gdb was concerned. It built exactly the same set of files.
Hmm... AFAIK, sh-hms is a variant of sh-coff, not sh-elf. Shouldn't
it be retained at least as an alias?
--
Alexandre Oliva Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer aoliva@{cygnus.com, redhat.com}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist Professional serial bug killer
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] Remove sh-hms target
2002-05-13 21:27 ` Alexandre Oliva
@ 2002-05-14 6:54 ` Elena Zannoni
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Elena Zannoni @ 2002-05-14 6:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alexandre Oliva; +Cc: Elena Zannoni, gdb-patches
Alexandre Oliva writes:
> On May 13, 2002, Elena Zannoni <ezannoni@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > The sh-hms target wasn't really doing anything different from sh-elf
> > for what gdb was concerned. It built exactly the same set of files.
>
> Hmm... AFAIK, sh-hms is a variant of sh-coff, not sh-elf. Shouldn't
> it be retained at least as an alias?
>
I think I didn't express myself clearly. You can still build a toolchain
with --target=sh-hms, it's just that the gdb executable will be exactly
the same as if you said --target=sh-elf.
The reason for 'removing' sh-hms is more for testing purposes than
anything else.
Elena
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2002-05-14 13:54 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2002-05-13 16:25 [PATCH] Remove sh-hms target Elena Zannoni
2002-05-13 21:27 ` Alexandre Oliva
2002-05-14 6:54 ` Elena Zannoni
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox