From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4731 invoked by alias); 23 Feb 2011 04:29:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 4721 invoked by uid 22791); 23 Feb 2011 04:29:35 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 04:29:29 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08B862BAC5C; Tue, 22 Feb 2011 23:29:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id FjocQssOtVe7; Tue, 22 Feb 2011 23:29:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E1A72BAAF3; Tue, 22 Feb 2011 23:29:27 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id DFF5A1459B0; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 08:29:18 +0400 (RET) Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 04:29:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Yao Qi Cc: Michael Snyder , "gdb@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: make clean doesn't run in gdbserver/common Message-ID: <20110223042918.GP2617@adacore.com> References: <4D642638.8090207@vmware.com> <4D647F61.5080307@codesourcery.com> <20110223033606.GO2617@adacore.com> <4D64842F.4010903@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4D64842F.4010903@codesourcery.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) 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: 2011-02/txt/msg00129.txt.bz2 > There are two common dirs in build tree, under gdb/ and gdbserver/ > respectively, so it is not a problem to run 'make distclean' on top of > gdb build tree. Aha, OK. Thanks for the explanation. > When building native gdb, it is redundant here to build libcommon.a for > the same target twice, but given gdb and gdbserver should be built > separately, we have to build libcommon.a separately. Yes, we can think > of a method to build libcommon.a once when building a native gdb. Given that this isn't going to work in the cross case (where gdbserver is going to be cross-compiled), I am not sure that it's really worth the effort and/or complication (if any). -- Joel