From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29323 invoked by alias); 2 Aug 2006 19:22:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 29291 invoked by uid 22791); 2 Aug 2006 19:22:01 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31.1) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 Aug 2006 19:21:58 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1G8MI0-0007C8-Am; Wed, 02 Aug 2006 15:21:56 -0400 Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2006 19:22:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: John David Anglin Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [Fwd: Is anyone using the HP compilers on PA-RISC with FSF GDB?] (fwd) Message-ID: <20060802192156.GA27488@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: John David Anglin , gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <200608021916.k72JGwFd002315@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200608021916.k72JGwFd002315@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11+cvs20060403 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-08/txt/msg00007.txt.bz2 On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 03:16:56PM -0400, John David Anglin wrote: > > > I have a question, though, which I think I've asked before. GCC on > > > HP/UX uses stabs, so only requires basic SOM support from GDB. That > > > > There have been requests for ELF debug support. The main issue as > > far as I can see is the lack of named sections and where to put stuff. Do you mean DWARF-2 here? If so, I completely agree. It seems like SOM has some named sections - at least we're managing to get objdump to tell me there's a GDB_STRINGS section - so I don't know what the problem is. > > > should be in decent shape still. But the stuff read by hpread.c is > > > only generated by the HP compilers (cc and aCC). > > > > > > - Are these compilers still important for C? > > > - Are these compilers still important for C++? > > > > Oh, I'm sure these compilers are still important to some people. > > However, I don't see the need to maintain support for the debug > > format generated by these compilers. There's no debug info in any > > of the system libraries, so this capability doesn't help development > > of open source applications under HP-UX. > > > > I should also say that access to HP compilers is necessary to > > maintain this code. Thus, it really can only be done by HP. If > > they don't maintain it, then it should be removed. At one point in the past, the Compaq testdrive systems offered aCC. I don't think they do any more though. Thanks for the response, Dave - if you don't think we need to hold on to aCC support, then I doubt anyone else will either. However, there's no need to rush; I'll wait for at least a few weeks, in case anyone else has comments, and then come back to this if no one does. > > On the otherhand, GCC C, C++, Ada and Java are now working quite well > > on PA-RISC for both Linux and HP-UX. So, I would suggest that we need > > to focus support in these areas. Of course, I'm a bit biased ;) I'd be much happier working on support for GCC :-) Especially if that means DWARF-2 debug information! -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery