From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24306 invoked by alias); 28 Apr 2007 16:27:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 24296 invoked by uid 22791); 28 Apr 2007 16:27:57 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from return.false.org (HELO return.false.org) (66.207.162.98) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sat, 28 Apr 2007 17:27:55 +0100 Received: from return.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by return.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C5844B267; Sat, 28 Apr 2007 11:27:53 -0500 (CDT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (dsl093-172-095.pit1.dsl.speakeasy.net [66.93.172.95]) by return.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CC4E4B262; Sat, 28 Apr 2007 11:27:53 -0500 (CDT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1Hhpm4-0003Tk-MV; Sat, 28 Apr 2007 12:27:52 -0400 Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2007 16:49:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Ulrich Weigand Cc: Luis Machado , gdb-patches ml Subject: Re: [RFC] Detecting and printing 128-bit long double values for PPC Message-ID: <20070428162752.GA13329@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Ulrich Weigand , Luis Machado , gdb-patches ml References: <20070428140823.GA31111@caradoc.them.org> <200704281624.l3SGOEJZ032044@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200704281624.l3SGOEJZ032044@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15 (2007-04-09) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-04/txt/msg00373.txt.bz2 On Sat, Apr 28, 2007 at 06:24:14PM +0200, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > We have the same situation on s390, where we switched from 64-bit to > 128-bit long double a while ago. Like PowerPC, there is currently no > way to recognize how a binary was built ... > > While an ABI marker might be a good idea in the future, we're stuck > with the situation right now that many unmarked 128-bit long double > binaries are already out there (e.g. all of SLES 10 and RHEL 5), > and we really should be able to debug those properly. > > Thus I'm wondering whether we shouldn't have a reasonable default > for unmarked binaries, presumably based on the system compiler > defaults detected at configure time for native builds, and then > provide a command allowing the user to override that default? Well, that's pretty much what I did for our customer who reported the equivalent problem with PowerPC -msoft-float; except instead of detecting it at configure time I added a manual configure option (since this was for a cross-debugger). But it doesn't really scale... I'm open to better ideas... -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery