From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-8129-listarch-gdb=sourceware.cygnus.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 11459 invoked by alias); 23 Mar 2002 18:14:58 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 11438 invoked from network); 23 Mar 2002 18:14:54 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO rwcrmhc51.attbi.com) (204.127.198.38)
  by 209.249.29.67 with SMTP; 23 Mar 2002 18:14:54 -0000
Received: from ocean.lucon.org ([12.234.143.38]) by rwcrmhc51.attbi.com
          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with ESMTP
          id <20020323181443.PJRI2626.rwcrmhc51.attbi.com@ocean.lucon.org>;
          Sat, 23 Mar 2002 18:14:43 +0000
Received: by ocean.lucon.org (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id 0D8CB125C7; Sat, 23 Mar 2002 10:14:41 -0800 (PST)
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2002 10:14:00 -0000
From: "H . J . Lu" <hjl@lucon.org>
To: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>
Cc: GDB <gdb@sources.redhat.com>, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: The canadian cross build is broken
Message-ID: <20020323101441.A799@lucon.org>
References: <20020322225214.A23883@lucon.org> <3C9C9F3A.6030609@cygnus.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: <3C9C9F3A.6030609@cygnus.com>; from ac131313@cygnus.com on Sat, Mar 23, 2002 at 10:28:58AM -0500
X-SW-Source: 2002-03/txt/msg00210.txt.bz2

On Sat, Mar 23, 2002 at 10:28:58AM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> > The current tree is broken when configured with
> > 
> > # ../configure --host=cpu1-linux --build=i386-linux --target=cpu1-linux
> > 
> > See
> > 
> > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/2002-02/msg00120.html
> > 
> > I have been using
> > 
> > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/2002-02/msg00169.html
> > 
> > I guess no one cares about it.
> 
> I note you CC:'d GCC but To:'d GDB.  Remember, GCC is the supplier here. 
>   Both GDB and BINUTILS are users.
> 
> The most useful thing to do would be to explain to the above person that 
> their patch should be submitted to gcc-patches@.
> 

I did. You can follow

http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/2002-02/msg00120.html

to see it. DJ believed my patch was wrong, but didn't provide a working
solution. So far, only 2 people complained. We need more people to tell
DJ to get it fixed. Maybe I should give up since my gcc, gdb and
binutils don't have this problem.


H.J.