From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28144 invoked by alias); 19 Feb 2010 16:44:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 28135 invoked by uid 22791); 19 Feb 2010 16:44:25 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mout1.freenet.de (HELO mout1.freenet.de) (195.4.92.91) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 19 Feb 2010 16:44:20 +0000 Received: from [195.4.92.21] (helo=11.mx.freenet.de) by mout1.freenet.de with esmtpa (ID ralf.corsepius@freenet.de) (port 25) (Exim 4.72 #1) id 1NiVxf-0006cx-9u; Fri, 19 Feb 2010 17:44:15 +0100 Received: from hsi-kbw-078-043-063-233.hsi4.kabel-badenwuerttemberg.de ([78.43.63.233]:59579 helo=[192.168.1.104]) by 11.mx.freenet.de with esmtpsa (ID ralf.corsepius@freenet.de) (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (port 465) (Exim 4.72 #1) id 1NiVxf-0003AE-5U; Fri, 19 Feb 2010 17:44:15 +0100 Message-ID: <4B7EBFDD.2090003@rtems.org> Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2010 16:44:00 -0000 From: Ralf Corsepius User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100120 Fedora/3.0.1-1.fc12 Thunderbird/3.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Joel Brobecker CC: Ralf Corsepius , gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: GDB 7.0.90 available for testing References: <20100219012023.GG9752@adacore.com> <4B7EBB95.1060909@rtems.org> <20100219163315.GE2793@adacore.com> In-Reply-To: <20100219163315.GE2793@adacore.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: 2010-02/txt/msg00142.txt.bz2 On 02/19/2010 05:33 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote: >> For example configure accepts --target=bfin-rtems4.10 without any >> complaint and subsequently builds binaries. > > I think that's a known situation I guessed as much - binutils and gcc are more restrictive, ... and unless I am in error, gdb once also was :( > - we don't check the correctness of > the target triplet - often the configure just assumes one of the > bareboard variants but that's highly speculative at best. when you're lucky, > you'll see an error message during the GDB configure, but otherwise, > yeah, GDB will fail at build time. Note: It did not fail at build-time - Building went absolutely smoothless -- gdb crashed at run-time! Ralf