2014-09-06 3:10 GMT+08:00 Joel Sherrill <joel.sherrill@oarcorp.com>:
>
> On 9/5/2014 12:00 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote:
>>>> 2014-09-05  Chung-Ju Wu  <jasonwucj@gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>>     * configure.ac (nds32*-*-*): Disable gdb.
>>>>     * configure: Regenerated.
>>> It looks like the part for not building gdb for or1k*-*-rtems* gets moved
>>> by this patch.  I know there was an issue with the initial submission of
>>> that change.
>>>
>>> Your patch appears to correct that also. I thought the properly regenerated
>>> configure had been committed. But I guess not.
>>>
>>> I am OK with the patch since or1k-rtems is in the same place but wanted
>>> to note that the generated file had extra stuff in it for a good reason.
>> We really should regenerate configure first, and then apply Chung-Ju's
>> patch next. There will come a day when we will be reverting that
>> patch, since hopefully GDB will be building for that target, one day.
>> We don't want the revert to accidently also revert the bits that
>> that resync configure with present-day configure.ac.
>>

Thank you for clarifying it.  That also makes sense to me. :)

Since you have done the configure regeneration in
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2014-09/msg00155.html ,
I have my patch updated as attached and ChangeLog is the same as follow:


2014-09-05  Chung-Ju Wu  <jasonwucj@gmail.com>

        * configure.ac (nds32*-*-*): Disable gdb.
        * configure: Regenerated.


Is the updated patch OK to commit?


Best regards,
jasonwucj