Re: [rfa/i386] Consolidate i386 targets

[Andrew Cagney <ac131313@ges.redhat.com>]

> On Sat, 3 Aug 2002, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> 
> 
>> This patch replaces a number of explicit i386 (-aout, -coff, -elf, -pe) 
>> targets with a generic ``i386-*'' pattern.
>> 
>> It then updates the MAINTAINERS file so that only one i386 target is 
>> listed or building: i386-elf.  This should cut down on the number of 
>> targets that need building.
> 
> 
> Why is this part a good idea?  DJGPP is still supported, right?

Yes, DJGPP is definitly still supported.  DJGPP is a native 
configuration though, and the above list applies to the cross debuggers.

>>        * MAINTAINERS: Drop i386-aout and i586-pc-msdosdjgpp from target
>>        list.
> 
> 
> Did I miss something?

I don't think so.  My understanding of the thread:
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2002-05/msg00774.html

> Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 13:21:46 -0400
>> From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>
> 
>> > 
>> > Sorry, I still don't understand: does this mean a remote debugger with
>> > some stub on the remote DOS/Windows machine?  Or maybe the stub (or
>> > gdbserver) running inside DOSEmu on the GNU/Linux box?
> 
>> 
>> Those are both valid.
>> 
> 
>> > My point is that DJGPP debugging is very special: there's no OS
>> > provision for system calls like ptrace etc., so the only way to debug
>> > a DJGPP inferior is to run it natively under a specially built program
>> > that is linked against the DJGPP debug support library.  I'm curious
>> > how does your cross build achieve that, since I believe neither
>> > gdbserver nor any of the remote-* modules support DJGPP as of now.
> 
>> 
>> I didn't say it would be useful.  But consult MAINTAINERS; everything
>> listed in the "Targets" section on a --target= line is currently
>> "expected" to be buildable as a cross debugger, to sanity check
>> changes.  That's all I was doing.
> 
> 
> Then I don't think you (or anyone else on this list) should be
> concerned with these problems: IMHO, a failure to build a
> dysfunctional version of GDB is not a failure at all.

is that trying to ensure that a cross DJGPP debugger always builds isn't 
useful.

enjoy,
Andrew