From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 409 invoked by alias); 11 Oct 2004 17:24:33 -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 401 invoked from network); 11 Oct 2004 17:24:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 11 Oct 2004 17:24:32 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9BHOQ3c003195 for ; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 13:24:27 -0400 Received: from localhost.redhat.com (porkchop.devel.redhat.com [172.16.58.2]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i9BHOJr12530; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 13:24:19 -0400 Received: from gnu.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 813EA28CD; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 13:23:56 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <416AC1AC.6050207@gnu.org> Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 17:24:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-GB; rv:1.4.1) Gecko/20041009 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: Mark Kettenis , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [patch/rfc] Build inf-ptrace.o when ptrace available References: <415DC09D.2070407@gnu.org> <200410012154.i91Ls6lE001359@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <41615D1E.8070007@gnu.org> <20041004143416.GA6653@nevyn.them.org> <416179DE.70401@gnu.org> <20041004163533.GA12898@nevyn.them.org> <416323A7.2010201@gnu.org> <20041005225914.GA28588@nevyn.them.org> In-Reply-To: <20041005225914.GA28588@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-10/txt/msg00199.txt.bz2 > I still do not believe that configure testing should be used for this > purpose. If we end up moving the knowledge of natfiles into configure, > then we can set inf-ptrace to be included for all native GNU/Linux > targets easily enough. So you're not objecting to changes making configure (actually configure.host and configure.tgt) directly handle what was previously in the .mh file ... > Or there are other ways to do it, as below. > > One of the reasons why I hold this position is that it lets us give a > more useful error message if someone's system is broken and can not > compile inf-ptrace.c for some reason that the configure script > detected. They'll get either a link failure or a GDB which can't debug > anything, instead of an error related to the compile problem. My > experience with automating distribution builds tells me that someone > will come up with a way to break their system in this fashion. .. but rather just objecting to having inf-ptrace selected dependant on autoconf magic? I could equally hardwire it vis: case $host in *-linux* | *-bsd* ) objs += inf-ptrace esac Can you show us the money here - on what systems did you encounter problems and what problems were they? The most recent problem I can think of was with the TUI, and that was a straight configure.in bug. >>>>>> >>>Why is it orthogonal? If we assume that configure determines when /proc >>>>>> >>>and ptrace() and provides both to the user it certainly isn't. Idea's >>>>>> >>>such as Mark's and mine would make it easier. >>> >>>> > >>>> > >>>> >Why is it related? How would this make it easier? It's not hard to >>>> >add a new backend file to all the Linux targets; it's really not much >>>> >different in a lot of little files than in one big one. I've done this >>>> >plenty of times. >> >>> >>> If we used configure.tgt and: >>> switch "$target" >>> *-*-linux* ) "objs=objs symfile-mem.c" >>> esac >>> then all GNU/Linux systems will always and consistently include >>> symtab-mem.c. We don't, they don't ... > > > This is no harder than having a common linux.mh, as GCC has done for > years (gcc/config/t-linux). It's not a technical differece between > configure-frobbing and makefile-fragmenting. So initially we can migrate things to configure.host, and then, if things prove to unwieldly, look at refactoring it. But not before. Andrew