From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <eliz@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org (eggs.gnu.org [IPv6:2001:470:142:3::10])
 by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 304043858D34
 for <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>; Thu,  2 Jul 2020 17:47:07 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 304043858D34
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org;
 dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=gnu.org
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=eliz@gnu.org
Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:37428)
 by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
 (envelope-from <eliz@gnu.org>)
 id 1jr3Ig-000155-NB; Thu, 02 Jul 2020 13:47:06 -0400
Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=4496 helo=home-c4e4a596f7)
 by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256)
 (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <eliz@gnu.org>)
 id 1jr3Ig-0007eH-3f; Thu, 02 Jul 2020 13:47:06 -0400
Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2020 20:47:05 +0300
Message-Id: <83o8oxx10m.fsf@gnu.org>
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
To: Simon Marchi <simon.marchi@polymtl.ca>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, brobecker@adacore.com,
	tromey@adacore.com
In-Reply-To: <a8818dc4-cb50-54a7-4c4f-ed5d62e195c0@polymtl.ca> (message from
 Simon Marchi on Thu, 2 Jul 2020 10:30:00 -0400)
Subject: Re: Building today's snapshot of GDB with MinGW
References: <83a70l20dn.fsf@gnu.org>
 <CAPTJ0XEokO0Ht787+19d2yWF3cxqtzv+q0RqKo+JoENuhxaMGg@mail.gmail.com>
 <83wo3ozlvn.fsf@gnu.org> <56f26808-dfb0-6703-6f1f-9818c35946dd@polymtl.ca>
 <83pn9fxofc.fsf@gnu.org> <83v9j6vxey.fsf@gnu.org>
 <9876615e-ab54-9fc4-4892-f855901e951e@polymtl.ca>
 <a8818dc4-cb50-54a7-4c4f-ed5d62e195c0@polymtl.ca>
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS,
 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,
 TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on
 server2.sourceware.org
X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://sourceware.org/mailman/options/gdb-patches>,
 <mailto:gdb-patches-request@sourceware.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-request@sourceware.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://sourceware.org/mailman/listinfo/gdb-patches>,
 <mailto:gdb-patches-request@sourceware.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2020 17:47:08 -0000

> From: Simon Marchi <simon.marchi@polymtl.ca>
> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, brobecker@adacore.com, tromey@adacore.com
> Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2020 10:30:00 -0400
> 
> > 290 i[34567]86-*-linux*)
> > 291         # Target: Intel 386 running GNU/Linux
> > 292         gdb_target_obs="i386-linux-tdep.o \
> > 293                         glibc-tdep.o \
> > 294                         solib-svr4.o symfile-mem.o \
> > 295                         linux-tdep.o linux-record.o"
> > 296         if test "x$enable_64_bit_bfd" = "xyes"; then
> > 297             # Target: GNU/Linux x86-64
> > 298             gdb_target_obs="amd64-linux-tdep.o ${gdb_target_obs}"
> > 299         fi
> > 300         ;;
> > 
> > We could perhaps do the same for Windows, I don't think there would be any
> > downsides to it, and it could be useful to some people.
> 
> In fact, we should probably do it, otherwise it's confusing.  You build GDB
> for Windows, GDB claims that it supports x86-64, since you can set it using
> "set architecture":
> 
>   (gdb) set architecture
>   auto               i386               i386:intel         i386:x64-32        i386:x64-32:intel  i386:x86-64        i386:x86-64:intel  i8086
> 
> But that's not really helpful because that GDB doesn't know about Windows
> on x86-64:
> 
>   (gdb) set architecture i386:x86-64
>   warning: A handler for the OS ABI "Windows" is not built into this configuration
>   of GDB.  Attempting to continue with the default i386:x86-64 settings.
> 
>   The target architecture is assumed to be i386:x86-64

I agree.