From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1309 invoked by alias); 30 Jan 2002 04:33:05 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 1177 invoked from network); 30 Jan 2002 04:33:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (128.2.145.6) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 30 Jan 2002 04:33:02 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16VmQM-0006YH-00; Tue, 29 Jan 2002 23:32:42 -0500 Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 20:33:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Andrew Cagney Cc: Dan Kegel , gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: How does one cross-compile gdbserver? Message-ID: <20020129233242.A25061@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Cagney , Dan Kegel , gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <3C574C25.8A2F007@kegel.com> <20020129205052.B19879@nevyn.them.org> <3C575A1C.5020700@cygnus.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3C575A1C.5020700@cygnus.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23i X-SW-Source: 2002-01/txt/msg00346.txt.bz2 On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 09:27:40PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote: > >On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 05:28:05PM -0800, Dan Kegel wrote: > > > >>I'm going crazy trying to build gdb 5.1.1's gdbserver > >>in a cross-development environment. > >> > >>Has anyone here build one recently? > >>If so, can you please post your recipe? > > > > > >(Just the day for this answer...) > > > >Same way as anything else! You need to have a compiler capable of > >building target userland binaries, and a development environment set up > >for same. You may need to run configure in the gdbserver directory > >manually, with CC set appropriately. Note that you want a gdb > >configured --host=, not --target=<>! > > > >I don't give it good odds of compiling. I've tried several times to > >clean that up and gotten stymied in various people's objections to my > >methods (sorry Andrew). I'll be taking another stab at it this week I > >think. > > > :-) > > I've been thinking about making it obsolete. Not that I want to lose > it. Rather that it clears the slate and removes any obligation to keep > other targets working. > > The other is to just declare it really broken. ... Do you want me to count the number of messages last summer where I wanted to do either of those? :) Seriously - my opinion is that it is totally broken at the present time, that I can fix it for one platform at a time, and that it would be cleaner if I first declared it broken for all targets. If you're more open to this idea now, I'll kick into high gear on it. I can probably get all the Linux and most of the *BSD targets fixed; all current-ish Solaris systems aren't even supported because gdbserver never grokked /proc, and the other supported systems are mostly obsolete or last tested on obsolete versions. -- Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer