Re: GDB on FreeBSD/Alpha

[Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>]

David O'Brien wrote:
> 
> On Tue, May 30, 2000 at 01:09:45AM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > I've managed to add the necessary support for FreeBSD/Alpha to the
> > version of GDB in CVS (not checked in yet).
> 
> Hi Mark,
> 
> What version of GDB will have these bits?  5.0.1 or 5.1?  What are the
> current release engineering plans for GDB?

If it were me, I'd personally just worry about getting things in the
trunk.  For 5.0.1 (if released) I had two things in mind:

	o	fixing core dumps

	o	fixing botched configury or builds

beyond that, the trunk should be good enough. What the target
maintainers do is, well, up to target maintainers :-)

According to my diary I'm ment to make noises about 5.1 at the start of
July.  Based on what I've learnt from 5.0 that would put a release
sometime in October/November.  Exactly when is an open question.

	Andrew
From ac131313@cygnus.com Thu Jun 01 01:15:00 2000
From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>
To: Rod Stewart <stewart@netwinder.org>
Cc: gdb@sourceware.cygnus.com, build@netwinder.org
Subject: Re: [Comments?] Nightly build of GNU tool chains. (fwd)
Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2000 01:15:00 -0000
Message-id: <39361B41.401807DF@cygnus.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10005301036440.30482-100000@kei.netwinder.org>
X-SW-Source: 2000-06/msg00001.html
Content-length: 1074

[I've pruned the cross post a little :-)]

Rod Stewart wrote:

> Send any comment/suggestions to: build@netwinder.org.

Plenty!  But first this sort of thing is very welcome.

Here are some suggested improvements to add to the end of the wish list:

Perhaps include the testsuite final numbers (pass, fail, xpass, xfail,
...) in the web page - that would allow people to quickly see trends and
pick better snapshots.

If check.log, build.log or summary.log somehow relate back to
gdb/testsuite/gdb.{sum,log} then maybe give them those names.  My first
guess was that ``build.log'' was from ``make all-gdb > build.log 2>&1''
and ``check.log'' was from ``make check-gdb > check.log 2>&1''.  Hmm,
having just downloaded ~2mb, it isn't true. Turns out that check.log
contains the contents of both sim.log + gdb.log. Could I suggest making
available:
``make all-gdb'' ``make check-gdb'' ``make check-sim'' gdb.log gdb.sum
sim.log sim.sum and those summary numbers.

BTW summary.log doesn't contain very much.

Anyway, thanks for the effort of making this all available.

	Andrew
From ac131313@cygnus.com Thu Jun 01 03:30:00 2000
From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>
To: GDB Discussion <gdb@sourceware.cygnus.com>
Subject: catch signal SIGNAL
Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2000 03:30:00 -0000
Message-id: <39363B38.305DE4CB@cygnus.com>
X-SW-Source: 2000-06/msg00002.html
Content-length: 294

Hello,

Was going through the GDB manual and noticed this feature was apparently
absent.  As a general idea, should there be a ``catch signal SIGNR''? 
Some of those hook-* may be removable with this.  Do people try to use
handle instead?

No, I'm not going to implement it myself :-)

	Andrew
From ac131313@cygnus.com Thu Jun 01 03:42:00 2000
From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>
To: robert somerville <somervil@cadvision.com>
Cc: gdb@sourceware.cygnus.com
Subject: Re: does GDB support IRIX 64 bit executables?
Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2000 03:42:00 -0000
Message-id: <39363DDA.4E64FA8C@cygnus.com>
References: <3935AC4B.12F7F004@cadvision.com> <3935B098.EAB6C771@cygnus.com> <3935CE99.CA9CC3D4@cadvision.com>
X-SW-Source: 2000-06/msg00003.html
Content-length: 1296

robert somerville wrote:
> 
> Andrew Cagney wrote:
> >
> > robert somerville wrote:
> > >
> > > especially executables produced by the MIPSpro compilers
> >
> > Um, can you be a little bit more specific?  Which ABI and native or
> > cross?  GDB internaly supports a number of MIPS ABIs, some 32 bit, some
> > 64 bit and some which are suffering an identity crisis.
> >
> >         enjoy,
> >                 Andrew
> 
> the native MIPSpro 7.3 serie\x13\x13\x13\x13s of compilers (f77/cc) in 64 bit mode (
> -64 flag )
> on R10000/R12000 chips.
> 
> I don't see a configuration option to build GDB for a 64bit enviroment,
> the default GDB build for IRIX6.5; 4.18/5.0 pukes, says
> wrong DWARF version on a 64bit executable. I suppose I could try gcc
> in 64 bit, but then f77 would be an issue for me.

I suspect it doesn't.  There is nothing in the news file.

GDB does support a number of 64 bit MIPS ABIs (eg EABI64) and that could
well be very like the ABI used by -64.  You can build a GDB supporting
these ABI's using targets like mips64-elf and mips64vr5000-elf.

Any way, I'd suggest trying to build a GDB using something like:

	CC="cc -64" ../gdb-5.0/configure
	make

This forces the IRIX 64 bit ABI to be used and hopefully that gets
things like procfs.c built using the correct headers.

	Andrew
From stewart@netwinder.org Thu Jun 01 08:20:00 2000
From: Rod Stewart <stewart@netwinder.org>
To: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>
Cc: gdb@sourceware.cygnus.com, build@netwinder.org
Subject: Re: [Comments?] Nightly build of GNU tool chains. (fwd)
Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2000 08:20:00 -0000
Message-id: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10006010947420.18934-100000@kei.netwinder.org>
References: <39361B41.401807DF@cygnus.com>
X-SW-Source: 2000-06/msg00004.html
Content-length: 1598

On Thu, 1 Jun 2000, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> Rod Stewart wrote:
> 
> Here are some suggested improvements to add to the end of the wish list:
> 
> Perhaps include the testsuite final numbers (pass, fail, xpass, xfail,
> ...) in the web page - that would allow people to quickly see trends and
> pick better snapshots.

That is what is supposed to be in test summary.log, just noticed it was
broken, should be fixed on tomorrows build. :)  For projects which use
dejagnu I'm using the test_summary script from gcc/contrib to generate
this list.

> If check.log, build.log or summary.log somehow relate back to
> gdb/testsuite/gdb.{sum,log} then maybe give them those names.  My first
> guess was that ``build.log'' was from ``make all-gdb > build.log 2>&1''
> and ``check.log'' was from ``make check-gdb > check.log 2>&1''.  Hmm,
> having just downloaded ~2mb, it isn't true. Turns out that check.log
> contains the contents of both sim.log + gdb.log. Could I suggest making
> available:
> ``make all-gdb'' ``make check-gdb'' ``make check-sim'' gdb.log gdb.sum
> sim.log sim.sum and those summary numbers.

Thanks for the comments here, I'll try to make things clearer over the
weekend.

build.log currently is the output of the entire rpm build, this includes
the part from "make -k check".  I'll try to split it up a bit.

I was not aware there were two outputs, one from check-gdb, and one from
check-sim.  I'll what can be done.

> BTW summary.log doesn't contain very much.

Fixed, see above.

Thanks for the comments.

FYI, I hope to add in Linux ix86 and Linux PPC targets soon as well.

-Rms