From: Nick Clifton <nickc@cambridge.redhat.com>
To: Elena Zannoni <ezannoni@redhat.com>
Cc: thorpej@wasabisystems.com, binutils@sources.redhat.com,
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFA] Include sh64 support for shle-*-netbsdelf*
Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 07:27:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m3u1pag5zn.fsf@north-pole.nickc.cambridge.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <15585.5715.936570.74188@localhost.redhat.com>
Hi Elena,
> > > The tdep gdb file is going to be built for all the sh targets. And
> > > that file requires the sh64 disassembly functions.
> >
> > In which case there may well be a problem. As it stands configuring
> > BFD as, eg, sh3-elf will not bring in the sh64 architecture or
> > disassembly functions. Can the tdep file be made conditional on the
> > SH architecture specified on the configure command line ?
> >
>
> No, it wouldn't be accepted. We are going towards unifying all the
> targets for a given architecture, so that we can switch at runtime
> with multiarch. I mean, it is not technically impossible, but it is
> philosophically inconsistent with where gdb is going nowadays. We are
> even going to build multiple architectures together, like sh and ppc,
> in a single executable. As a matter of fact I had such defines when I
> first submitted the port, and I removed them.
Hmm, OK - in which case would it be acceptable to say that in order to
obtain GDB support an SH toolchain should be configured as "sh-elf"
and not "sh3-elf" even if the intended default processor is the SH3 ?
ie that configurations such as "sh3-elf" are becoming obsolete and
will one day be removed ?
Cheers
Nick
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-05-14 14:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-05-11 11:56 Jason R Thorpe
2002-05-13 1:48 ` Nick Clifton
2002-05-13 8:23 ` Jason R Thorpe
2002-05-13 10:35 ` Nick Clifton
2002-05-13 15:13 ` Elena Zannoni
2002-05-13 14:28 ` Jason R Thorpe
2002-05-13 15:13 ` Elena Zannoni
2002-05-14 1:50 ` Nick Clifton
2002-05-14 6:51 ` Elena Zannoni
2002-05-14 7:27 ` Nick Clifton [this message]
2002-05-14 8:17 ` Elena Zannoni
[not found] ` <m3offha19r.fsf@north-pole.nickc.cambridge.redhat.com>
[not found] ` <3CE2B34F.EAAEF3F8@superh.com>
[not found] ` <15587.63152.235989.94659@localhost.redhat.com>
2002-05-17 5:40 ` print_insn_sh cleanup Joern Rennecke
2002-05-17 6:54 ` Elena Zannoni
2002-05-17 7:39 ` Joern Rennecke
2002-05-20 4:22 ` Alexandre Oliva
2002-05-20 6:29 ` Joern Rennecke
2002-05-20 6:57 ` Hans-Peter Nilsson
2002-05-14 8:20 ` [PATCH/RFA] Include sh64 support for shle-*-netbsdelf* Alexandre Oliva
2002-05-14 8:38 ` Elena Zannoni
2002-05-14 8:46 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=m3u1pag5zn.fsf@north-pole.nickc.cambridge.redhat.com \
--to=nickc@cambridge.redhat.com \
--cc=binutils@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=ezannoni@redhat.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=thorpej@wasabisystems.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox