From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20720 invoked by alias); 1 Apr 2008 20:36:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 20711 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Apr 2008 20:36:40 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Apr 2008 20:36:20 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8E96983BE; Tue, 1 Apr 2008 20:36:17 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9461998119; Tue, 1 Apr 2008 20:36:17 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1JgnDL-0001XW-SX; Tue, 01 Apr 2008 16:36:16 -0400 Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2008 20:36:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: "Anmol P. Paralkar" Cc: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Regenerate config/features/rs6000 Message-ID: <20080401203615.GA5522@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: "Anmol P. Paralkar" , gdb@sourceware.org References: <47F16D39.4040608@eagercon.com> <20080331234135.GA29623@caradoc.them.org> <47F17A97.1000408@eagercon.com> <20080401010823.GA1649@caradoc.them.org> <20080401171247.GA26455@caradoc.them.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-12-11) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-04/txt/msg00009.txt.bz2 On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 03:22:05PM -0500, Anmol P. Paralkar wrote: >> Meanwhile, I'd love to remove the circular dependency, but I haven't >> thought of a way to do it yet. > > When you say circular dependency, you mean using a GDB to generate a > part of itself, right? For variants of existing architecures this not > so non-intuitive. However, when adding a brand new arch. (e.g. say if we > had XML descriptions in place and were adding support for the e500), The e500 is not a brand new architecture, as far as GDB is concerned. It's what I was calling a variant. It's adding XML support to a new foo*-* target that's really awkward. > one has to teach it about the new architecture first, else it's not > going to like the: powerpc:e500 resulting in: > > warning: while parsing target description (at line ): Target description specified unknown architecture "powerpc:e500" > warning: Could not load XML target description; ignoring > There is no target description to print. > > For a situation like that, is there a simpler process than/alternative to > the one I outlined in my previous mail? I see. All you need to add before you can do this is the BFD bits; you shouldn't need to add it to GDB's list, but PowerPC might be special in this regard. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery