From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25395 invoked by alias); 24 Sep 2004 21:24:18 -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 25387 invoked from network); 24 Sep 2004 21:24:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 24 Sep 2004 21:24:18 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i8OLNwUA010450 for ; Fri, 24 Sep 2004 17:24:08 -0400 Received: from localhost.redhat.com (porkchop.devel.redhat.com [172.16.58.2]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i8OLNqr14903; Fri, 24 Sep 2004 17:23:52 -0400 Received: from gnu.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F00B02BA2; Fri, 24 Sep 2004 16:44:33 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <41548731.7000704@gnu.org> Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 21:24:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-GB; rv:1.4.1) Gecko/20040831 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Orjan Friberg Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Upcoming target: CRISv32 References: <41541817.3020102@axis.com> In-Reply-To: <41541817.3020102@axis.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-09/txt/msg00220.txt.bz2 > I'm starting to feel pretty confident about my CRISv32 port, and would like some advice as to how to proceed. The thing is, the CRISv32 binutils port won't be submitted for another few weeks. Obviously this means that gdb for CRISv32 won't build. > > On the other hand, submitting it would have its benefits regarding ongoing deprecation etc, and (more importantly) I assume it will be easier to get non-architecture specific patches accepted. > > If submitting a non-buildable port is frowned upon, then I'd be happy to sit on it until the binutils code is in place. Your call. I'd recommend trying to keep cris-elf building though, if it isn't then you'll want to update MAINTAINERS marking it as broken. > For the record: basically what's left at the moment are some FAILs in the most recent gdb.base/sigstep.exp and gdb.threads/schedlock.exp (problem explained in http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2004-08/msg00733.html and http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2004-08/msg00781.html) which I need to fix. In addition, I need to submit a generalisation of the existing STEP_SKIPS_IN_DELAY mechanism. Andrew