From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx2.suse.de (mx2.suse.de [195.135.220.15]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 847B43857001 for ; Tue, 18 Aug 2020 08:48:59 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 847B43857001 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.de Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=tdevries@suse.de X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.221.27]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22845B021; Tue, 18 Aug 2020 08:49:24 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH] gdb: fix IA64 build failure of linux-nat To: Simon Marchi , Sergei Trofimovich , Kevin Buettner Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Sergei Trofimovich References: <20200519212710.1417100-1-slyfox@gentoo.org> <20200519150041.13df2b38@f31-4.lan> <20200816094521.061554bb@sf> <5f684182-c8d5-744b-8486-18f89ffb30a3@suse.de> From: Tom de Vries Autocrypt: addr=tdevries@suse.de; keydata= xsBNBF0ltCcBCADDhsUnMMdEXiHFfqJdXeRvgqSEUxLCy/pHek88ALuFnPTICTwkf4g7uSR7 HvOFUoUyu8oP5mNb4VZHy3Xy8KRZGaQuaOHNhZAT1xaVo6kxjswUi3vYgGJhFMiLuIHdApoc u5f7UbV+egYVxmkvVLSqsVD4pUgHeSoAcIlm3blZ1sDKviJCwaHxDQkVmSsGXImaAU+ViJ5l CwkvyiiIifWD2SoOuFexZyZ7RUddLosgsO0npVUYbl6dEMq2a5ijGF6/rBs1m3nAoIgpXk6P TCKlSWVW6OCneTaKM5C387972qREtiArTakRQIpvDJuiR2soGfdeJ6igGA1FZjU+IsM5ABEB AAHNH1RvbSBkZSBWcmllcyA8dGRldnJpZXNAc3VzZS5kZT7CwKsEEwEIAD4WIQSsnSe5hKbL MK1mGmjuhV2rbOJEoAUCXSW0JwIbAwUJA8JnAAULCQgHAgYVCgkICwIEFgIDAQIeAQIXgAAh CRDuhV2rbOJEoBYhBKydJ7mEpsswrWYaaO6FXats4kSgc48H/Ra2lq5p3dHsrlQLqM7N68Fo eRDf3PMevXyMlrCYDGLVncQwMw3O/AkousktXKQ42DPJh65zoXB22yUt8m0g12xkLax98KFJ 5NyUloa6HflLl+wQL/uZjIdNUQaHQLw3HKwRMVi4l0/Jh/TygYG1Dtm8I4o708JS4y8GQxoQ UL0z1OM9hyM3gI2WVTTyprsBHy2EjMOu/2Xpod95pF8f90zBLajy6qXEnxlcsqreMaqmkzKn 3KTZpWRxNAS/IH3FbGQ+3RpWkNGSJpwfEMVCeyK5a1n7yt1podd1ajY5mA1jcaUmGppqx827 8TqyteNe1B/pbiUt2L/WhnTgW1NC1QDOwE0EXSW0JwEIAM99H34Bu4MKM7HDJVt864MXbx7B 1M93wVlpJ7Uq+XDFD0A0hIal028j+h6jA6bhzWto4RUfDl/9mn1StngNVFovvwtfzbamp6+W pKHZm9X5YvlIwCx131kTxCNDcF+/adRW4n8CU3pZWYmNVqhMUiPLxElA6QhXTtVBh1RkjCZQ Kmbd1szvcOfaD8s+tJABJzNZsmO2hVuFwkDrRN8Jgrh92a+yHQPd9+RybW2l7sJv26nkUH5Z 5s84P6894ebgimcprJdAkjJTgprl1nhgvptU5M9Uv85Pferoh2groQEAtRPlCGrZ2/2qVNe9 XJfSYbiyedvApWcJs5DOByTaKkcAEQEAAcLAkwQYAQgAJhYhBKydJ7mEpsswrWYaaO6FXats 4kSgBQJdJbQnAhsMBQkDwmcAACEJEO6FXats4kSgFiEErJ0nuYSmyzCtZhpo7oVdq2ziRKD3 twf7BAQBZ8TqR812zKAD7biOnWIJ0McV72PFBxmLIHp24UVe0ZogtYMxSWKLg3csh0yLVwc7 H3vldzJ9AoK3Qxp0Q6K/rDOeUy3HMqewQGcqrsRRh0NXDIQk5CgSrZslPe47qIbe3O7ik/MC q31FNIAQJPmKXX25B115MMzkSKlv4udfx7KdyxHrTSkwWZArLQiEZj5KG4cCKhIoMygPTA3U yGaIvI/BGOtHZ7bEBVUCFDFfOWJ26IOCoPnSVUvKPEOH9dv+sNy7jyBsP5QxeTqwxC/1ZtNS DUCSFQjqA6bEGwM22dP8OUY6SC94x1G81A9/xbtm9LQxKm0EiDH8KBMLfQ== Message-ID: <84fc876b-1e3c-8342-d342-ec68985cc273@suse.de> Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2020 10:46:26 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2020 08:49:00 -0000 On 8/17/20 10:21 AM, Simon Marchi wrote: > On 2020-08-17 4:54 a.m., Tom de Vries wrote: >> Hi, >> >> IA64 support was just obsoleted in bfd (commit 73d0dc162e "Obsolete ia64"). >> >> So, AFAIU, this should now be built with --enable-obsolete. >> >> What are the consequences for gdb IA64 patches ? >> >> Thanks, >> - Tom > > By transitivity, I'd say that the GDB port is also obsolete. But as long as it's in > the tree, it's fine to accept patches to keep it building (otherwise it's useless to > keep it in the tree). > Btw, I just found in gdb/configure.tgt: ... echo "*** Configuration $targ is obsolete." >&2 echo "*** Support has been REMOVED." >&2 exit 1 ... So, maybe in gdb a target is obsolete once it's removed? There seems to be no separate means to declare a target obsolete before it's removed. > If you wanted to build GDB with --target=ia64-something-something, you'll need to pass > --enable-obsolete in order to build BFD, which is a required dependency of GDB. When we > pass --enable-targets=all, it builds a GDB with ia64 support without requiring that > --enable-obsolete flag though. > Hmm, I find that last bit surprising. > Do you know what's the BFD policy for obsolete configurations? If they wanted to get > rid of it completely, they would need to remove GDB support too, otherwise they'd break > the build. So should we eventually take the lead and remove support for it first? > I don't know the policy, but the discussion about ia64 took place here ( https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/2020-August/112825.html , helpfully titled "Time to obsolete arm-symbian?" ). It was mentioned that there was a segfault since at least binutils 2.31 on ia64, which had not been addressed by anybody, and "Assuming no one cares enough about ia64 to contribute fixes for the segfaults, ia64 would remain in binutils until after the next release, at which point the ia64 support code might be removed". Thanks, - Tom > Sergei, quick survey: do you, or someone you know actually use GDB on ia64? Or you just > noticed it not building because you package it? > > Simon >