From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7023 invoked by alias); 25 Feb 2004 20:17:52 -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 6947 invoked from network); 25 Feb 2004 20:17:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 25 Feb 2004 20:17:50 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.30 #1 (Debian)) id 1Aw5TZ-0005kb-IN; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:17:49 -0500 Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 20:17:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Joel Brobecker Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC/RFA] (testsuite/Ada) Add gdb_compile_ada Message-ID: <20040225201749.GA21911@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Joel Brobecker , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <20040224195615.GC542@gnat.com> <20040224230812.GE542@gnat.com> <20040225183211.GH1105@gnat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040225183211.GH1105@gnat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2004-02/txt/msg00740.txt.bz2 On Wed, Feb 25, 2004 at 10:32:11AM -0800, Joel Brobecker wrote: > Continuing my fascinating monologous with myself :) > > > - Object files are placed in the testsuite directory. I'd rather > > see them being placed in gdb.ada. > > > > I managed to do this, but I a not completely sure that it's such > > a good idea after all. See patch below. On the one hand, the object > > files et al are placed in gdb.ada rather than gdb/testsuite, but > > on the other hand this has a slight impact in the debug info generated > > by the compiler, since the source file name is no longer absolute. > > So this change is not completely transparent for the debugger... > > What do you think? > > Actually, I just noticed that the few tests that do generate object > files and other compilation artifacts actually leave them in the > testsuite directory, not inside the gdb.* directories. > > So I would be tempted to discard the idea above of making sure that > all these artifacts be placed in the gdb.ada directory for all Ada > testcases. Hence the attached patch. One note, however: contrary to > C where temporary .o files are automatically deleted, gnatmake leaves > behind. This is to allow incremental builds, similar what make does. > This will cause a much higher number of object files to be created > in the testsuite directory. I hope this is fine? Otherwise, we'll > can use the previous approach, but I believe it should be done > consistently across all languages. I would prefer to have them placed in the subdirectory. Can't you specify an output directory for gnatmake? It seems like a terrible limitation. Also, gdb_compile_ada may want to remove the incremental files in this case, since the testsuite will not use them. > + lappend options "compiler=gnatmake" See find_gcc in dejagnu's libgloss.exp. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer