From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24316 invoked by alias); 22 Nov 2004 19:35:30 -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 24255 invoked from network); 22 Nov 2004 19:35:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO walton.sibelius.xs4all.nl) (82.92.89.47) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 22 Nov 2004 19:35:24 -0000 Received: from elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl [192.168.0.2]) by walton.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id iAMJZOiB031577; Mon, 22 Nov 2004 20:35:24 +0100 (CET) Received: from elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.12.6p3/8.12.6) with ESMTP id iAMJZNs0011329; Mon, 22 Nov 2004 20:35:23 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from kettenis@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl) Received: (from kettenis@localhost) by elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.12.6p3/8.12.6/Submit) id iAMJZMJr011326; Mon, 22 Nov 2004 20:35:22 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 19:35:00 -0000 Message-Id: <200411221935.iAMJZMJr011326@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> From: Mark Kettenis To: randolph@tausq.org CC: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <20041122173140.GB9148@tausq.org> (message from Randolph Chung on Mon, 22 Nov 2004 09:31:40 -0800) Subject: Re: [COMMIT] Cleanup HP-UX 10.20 support such that it builds again References: <20041122173140.GB9148@tausq.org> X-SW-Source: 2004-11/txt/msg00439.txt.bz2 Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 09:31:40 -0800 From: Randolph Chung > * hppa-hpux-nat.c: New file. Mark, is there any particular reason why we can't fix hppah-nat.c instead of introducing a new file altogether? Is hpux10.20 really so different from hpux11i? Well, with software, everything is possible. But to be honest, I really think fixing hppah-nat.c would really be a lot of work, and I think the end-result still won't be pretty. To answer your question: Yes, HP-UX 10.20 is radically different from HP-UX 11.xx. If you strip away all the layers of goo that the HP people have added, you'll see that HP-UX 10.20 is a rather traditional ptrace(2) target, while HP-UX 11.xx uses the HP-UX specific ttrace(2) function. Actually, most of the contents of hppah-nat.c, infptrace.c, inftarg.c and infttrace.c is goo to make ttrace(2) look like ptrace(2). Together that goo adds up to more lines of code than the new code in hppa-hpux-nat.c. if possible I'd like to avoid having so many pa files to maintain :) Hopefully my next step can accomplish that. I'm currently working on a replacement for infttrace.c. Actually it's already working pretty well for 32-bit HP-UX 11.00, although follow-fork/vfork/exec and "hardware" watchpoints don't work yet. I'll probably check something in today or tomorrow. Then after I've re-implemented the missing features we can throw the switch and get rid of hppah-nat.c, infttrace.c and inftarg.c. The end-result will be significantly less code that will be much easier to maintain than the current code. The major benefit of this all (and the emajor goal) is to make HP-UX considerably less special than it is now. I think this is essential for the future of the HP-UX GDB port. Without major surgery, it just won't survive the changes being made to the core parts of GDB. Cheers, Mark