From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6301 invoked by alias); 19 Apr 2002 01:15:44 -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 6272 invoked from network); 19 Apr 2002 01:15:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (128.2.145.6) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 19 Apr 2002 01:15:40 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 16yN0R-0004WN-00; Thu, 18 Apr 2002 21:16:07 -0400 Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 18:15:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Andrew Cagney Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Multi-arch only GDB 6.0 .... Message-ID: <20020418211607.A16989@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Cagney , gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <3CBF600D.8090205@cygnus.com> <20020418201548.A14027@nevyn.them.org> <3CBF6BEF.2050003@cygnus.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3CBF6BEF.2050003@cygnus.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23i X-SW-Source: 2002-04/txt/msg00323.txt.bz2 On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 08:59:27PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote: > > >It's a nice idea, but can we really ditch all the non-multi-arch targets? > >I think you filed bugs about them all at one point; could you give an > >exact list of the targets that would be going? > > Lets turn the question around. > > Why should GDB 6.0 retain support non-multi-arch targets? If someone > needs to debug a non-multi-arch target they can download GDB 5.x. Let me be clearer; I think there are some targets we need to allow time to fix ourselves based on userbase, rather than on maintained-ness. I would wager that GDB on Alpha has a fair number of users, and it seems to work relatively well. If they prove unreasonably difficult to multi-arch, well, that's a different story. > For current status, see the file src/gdb/MAINTAINERS. Hmm, the ARM > entry is out-of-date! The ones marked as ``OBSOLETE candidate'' are > first up. > > >I'm stuck maintaining GDB for Debian right now. In our current > >release, that's 11 architectures. I think that at the least Sparc, > >Alpha, and m68k are non-multi-arch (and HPPA is non-contributed, but > >there's nothing I can do about that...). We may be able to talk David > >into cleaning up Sparc, but at the other two are also still in active > >use. I think that we need to allow more time in order to get as many > >targets as possible converted over - I'll do the two I mentioned myself > >if no one else has time, but it'll take a while. > > The SPARC is multi-arch, Alpha is WIP, m68k had an expression of > interest, HP/UX is typically broken. Most of SPARC is only multiarch if it snuck in with David's cleanups recently. A day-old tree: tm-sp64.h:#define GDB_MULTI_ARCH GDB_MULTI_ARCH_PARTIAL tm-sp64linux.h:#define GDB_MULTI_ARCH 0 tm-sun4sol2.h:#define GDB_MULTI_ARCH GDB_MULTI_ARCH_PARTIAL Someone was working on HP/UX just a little while ago - Jeff Law, I think. -- Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer