From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id JR13O3KZuWN1rBEAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Sat, 07 Jan 2023 11:10:26 -0500 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id E736B1E222; Sat, 7 Jan 2023 11:10:26 -0500 (EST) Authentication-Results: simark.ca; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; secure) header.d=sourceware.org header.i=@sourceware.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=PTaF3RMm; dkim-atps=neutral X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED, RDNS_DYNAMIC,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from sourceware.org (ip-8-43-85-97.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A02CA1E110 for ; Sat, 7 Jan 2023 11:10:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7CF43858416 for ; Sat, 7 Jan 2023 16:10:25 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org C7CF43858416 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1673107825; bh=kbWbutBX+p7t7LG9IEXWFtCSnPQ5/uFfPRACHfL0wgg=; h=Date:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:Subject:References:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From:Reply-To:From; b=PTaF3RMmQd0WKwvMcCaWYw3WmM1rCs1Mwofc6t//uKeG/JZCZZHms7XOKq0nG5AjR taDYgNL35k0qGCyHEXrLEBaIOjHoFqs3FrHZQH/FzL86cY3tpQNZSqUmUayvg3HbG6 bzwjb4XfpyEkQeWLK/QW/Akxsi0c+rRgF+co4QSA= Received: from eggs.gnu.org (eggs.gnu.org [IPv6:2001:470:142:3::10]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 250453858D35 for ; Sat, 7 Jan 2023 16:10:07 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 250453858D35 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pEBlm-0000wA-01; Sat, 07 Jan 2023 11:10:06 -0500 Received: from [87.69.77.57] (helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pEBll-0003uO-G8; Sat, 07 Jan 2023 11:10:05 -0500 Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2023 18:10:26 +0200 Message-Id: <83zgauqqa5.fsf@gnu.org> To: Andreas Schwab Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: <87zgaufj4w.fsf@igel.home> (message from Andreas Schwab on Sat, 07 Jan 2023 16:40:15 +0100) Subject: Re: Two observations using GDB 13 snapshot References: <83h6xugc5v.fsf@gnu.org> <83r0w6uaad.fsf@gnu.org> <87fscmemeo.fsf@linux-m68k.org> <83358mu1tv.fsf@gnu.org> <87bknaek9z.fsf@linux-m68k.org> <83v8lisjlx.fsf@gnu.org> <87lemeh4wz.fsf@igel.home> <83h6x2sb5x.fsf@gnu.org> <87cz7qh2db.fsf@igel.home> <83a62usabj.fsf@gnu.org> <878rieh194.fsf@igel.home> <838ries9je.fsf@gnu.org> <874jt2h0hq.fsf@igel.home> <835ydis7qt.fsf@gnu.org> <87zgaufj4w.fsf@igel.home> X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Eli Zaretskii via Gdb-patches Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" > From: Andreas Schwab > Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org > Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2023 16:40:15 +0100 > > On Jan 07 2023, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > >> From: Andreas Schwab > >> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org > >> Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2023 15:40:01 +0100 > >> > >> On Jan 07 2023, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > >> > >> > So the problem is that we are now using libtool, and that causes the > >> > GDB executable to be in a directory different from where gdb-gdb.gdb > >> > is kept. > >> > >> That does not happen for me. Did you configure with --enable-shared? > > > > No. Why would I need to? > > Without it, libtool should have no reason to put gdb in .libs. I see. Well, here it is. > > GDB is not a library, and doesn't build libraries that need to be > > installed, AFAIK. > > So why does it create the gdb binary in .libs? It is empty for me. I don't know. Any libtool experts around here?