From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30428 invoked by alias); 20 Aug 2002 16:11:11 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 30410 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2002 16:11:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO crack.them.org) (65.125.64.184) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 20 Aug 2002 16:11:10 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org ([66.93.61.169] ident=mail) by crack.them.org with asmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17hBal-0005R8-00; Tue, 20 Aug 2002 11:10:51 -0500 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17hBbL-0006pr-00; Tue, 20 Aug 2002 12:11:27 -0400 Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 09:11:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Andrew Cagney Cc: Jason R Thorpe , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [patch/rfc] Don't complain about unknown OSABI Message-ID: <20020820161127.GA26026@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Cagney , Jason R Thorpe , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <3D5FC00D.50001@ges.redhat.com> <20020818154927.GA20358@nevyn.them.org> <3D5FCE6A.9080308@ges.redhat.com> <20020819161543.GA10137@nevyn.them.org> <3D61792B.1020708@ges.redhat.com> <20020820015542.GA12371@nevyn.them.org> <3D626854.1040500@ges.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3D626854.1040500@ges.redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2002-08/txt/msg00591.txt.bz2 On Tue, Aug 20, 2002 at 12:03:32PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote: > > >>GDB uses ../bfd/config.bfd to find the default architecture. I think > >>this has made our lives much easier -- gdb's and bfd's defaults match > >>and we don't have to maintain anything. It really is a ``free lunch'' :-) > >> > >>Is there an equivalent for the OS/ABI? If we can pick that default up > >>from binutils then we also get that for free. On the other hand if we > >>start wiring this stuff into configure.tgt (duplicating ld/gcc) we take > >>on an additional maintenance task. > > > > > >Exactly my point. There is no OS/ABI equivalent; BFD doesn't know what > >it is, and doesn't need to. > > > >I'll try to put this together tomorrow. No, I won't. Too much arguing about the interaction with set architecture that I didn't find in my inbox till after I said that. I'd be willing to put together a version that didn't do that, leaving the subtleties for a later hacker, but I expect Andrew wouldn't like that very much :) > Ah, M'kay :-) > > Next question. Given an unbranded mips-elf binary, what should the > following GDB's do? > > gdb > m68k-linux-gnu-gdb Probably complain, unknown architecture. Yes, I know you mentioned that one can do a certain amount of debugging with just an ELF-aware GDB. Not enough that the OSABI ever comes into play, though. > mips-gdb > linux-gnu-gdb > elf-gdb These are all exceedingly hypothetical beasts at the moment, so I don't know quite what you mean by the "triplet"s. > mips-linux-gnu-gdb > mips-netbsd-gdb Default to Linux, default to NetBSD. > Having the behavour key off the target creates a problem with an > identical executable behaving differently with different, but similar > GDBs. I suspect it will encourage people to build different GDB's for > identical purposes when just a single GDB is needed. That's my point though. I _need_ for a MIPS/Linux GDB to default to MIPS/Linux if there's a missing branding. That's an ease-of-use, obviousness-of-use thing. GDB has to accept that its detection mechanisms are sometimes imperfect. There will be a set osabi command of some sort, it now seems, so the user could always override if necessary. Just a single GDB is needed. But using the right tool for the task, or at least a wrapper which sets the right variables for the task... -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer