From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16858 invoked by alias); 12 Nov 2008 08:32:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 16583 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Nov 2008 08:32:17 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mel.act-europe.fr (HELO mel.act-europe.fr) (212.99.106.210) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 12 Nov 2008 08:31:38 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-smtp.eu.adacore.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB39B290003; Wed, 12 Nov 2008 09:31:35 +0100 (CET) Received: from mel.act-europe.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.eu.adacore.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ToahLqQHeHGK; Wed, 12 Nov 2008 09:31:35 +0100 (CET) Received: from ulanbator.act-europe.fr (ulanbator.act-europe.fr [10.10.0.139]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mel.act-europe.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F6D8290001; Wed, 12 Nov 2008 09:31:34 +0100 (CET) Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Message-Id: <2D7B8509-CAB5-48A2-BD70-91E79675FB42@adacore.com> From: Tristan Gingold To: Stan Shebs In-Reply-To: <49187306.6090201@earthlink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v929.2) Subject: Re: [RFC] Darwin port (Part 0) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 08:34:00 -0000 References: <49187306.6090201@earthlink.net> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.929.2) 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: 2008-11/txt/msg00221.txt.bz2 On Nov 10, 2008, at 6:44 PM, Stan Shebs wrote: > Tristan Gingold wrote: >> here are a patch to add a new host/target: Darwin (or MacOS X). > This is very exciting! I've made a couple tries at getting this > going, but never managed to get the code disentangled enough to be > useful. Rewriting sounds like it was the right way to cut the > knot. :-) Thanks. > What kind of pass/fail numbers are you seeing for the testsuite > right now? (There's no threshold for submittability, but it tells us > what to expect.) I haven't tried the GDB testsuite yet. On our testsuite the results are rather good (less than 5% of failures) but: * as there is no support for shared libraries GDB can't call malloc() * dSYM files should work well but they are not automatically generated * reading dwarf from .o mostly works provided -fno-common is used... Tristan.