Re: [5.1] Re: status of gdb on Tru64 5.1?

[Joel Brobecker <brobecker@act-europe.fr>]

> Is there an update on this? I.e. does GDB work on True64?  (hmm, 
> perhaphs, I've already asked this question).

I recently sent the following message to somebody enquiring the status
of GDB on Tru64:
<<
> Does anyone know if/when the tru64 5.1 patch for gdb will be added?  I just
> pulled down the latest CVS and it's not in there.

I am not clear about the patch you are talking about. The first patch I
submitted for Tru64 5.1 did not meet the GDB standards. For one thing, I
had to break it down into smaller pieces. But most of the important
changes were better done by Nick Duffeck, so his changes were checked
in, and I only integrated small pieces that his patch did not contain.
      
> Alternatively, if Joel's patch works, can one of you send me the
> alpha-osf5.mh patch (or diff from alpha-osf3.mh)?  (It wasn't included in
> Joel's original post.)
      
The bad news is that I just tried today's snapshot and I also failed to
build it. I don't think this is because of the lack of the
alpha-osf5.mh. For me, the build failed in alpha-nat.c, where it fails
to find the EF_* macros. This is probably a minor problem, these macros
are defined inside /usr/include/machine/reg.h (BTW, on our machine,
"machine" is actually a link to "alpha"). And it is #include'd from
alpha-nat.c, they are just conditionalized by

   #if defined(_KERNEL) || defined(_EXCEPTION_FRAME)
        
I unfortunately don't have much more time at the moment to help you more
on this issue. I hope this will help you making some progress.
>>

I'm not sure anymore, but I thought that Nick's patch was allowing GDB
to build on both Tru64 4.0 and 5.1... Strangely, I even remember being
able to rebuild it myself on our machines. Either I have incorrect
memories, or maybe a later change broke the build, or we forgot
to check-in something.

For the compilation problem, I still have the original fix that I sent
with my first message. I can clean it to satisfy Andrew's comments, and
resubmit it. But I would prefer to some feedback from others, to see if
they have the same build problems or not. At the moment, I am still
unclear whether it is local to our machine, or a forgotten change.

-- 
Joel