From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 74270 invoked by alias); 31 Mar 2015 14:39:48 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 74260 invoked by uid 89); 31 Mar 2015 14:39:47 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: OARmail.OARCORP.com Received: from oarmail.oarcorp.com (HELO OARmail.OARCORP.com) (67.63.146.244) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 31 Mar 2015 14:39:45 +0000 Received: from [192.168.1.169] (192.168.1.169) by OARmail.OARCORP.com (192.168.2.2) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.342.0; Tue, 31 Mar 2015 09:39:42 -0500 Message-ID: <551AB1AD.7050509@oarcorp.com> Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 14:39:00 -0000 From: Joel Sherrill User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jan-Benedict Glaw CC: Joel Brobecker , "gdb@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: x86_64-elf gdb References: <55171834.40509@oarcorp.com> <20150330163952.GE12083@adacore.com> <5B7C7627-4AA7-4276-B2EB-A9E5C170CBAA@oarcorp.com> <20150330205442.GG12083@adacore.com> <5519B945.8030605@oarcorp.com> <20150331024600.GJ4243@lug-owl.de> In-Reply-To: <20150331024600.GJ4243@lug-owl.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-03/txt/msg00128.txt.bz2 On 3/30/2015 9:46 PM, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote: > On Mon, 2015-03-30 15:59:49 -0500, Joel Sherrill wrote: >> On 3/30/2015 3:54 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote: >>>> It built for me. But I don't have any way to test it. Is that >>>> enough to submit a patch for the elf stanza addition? >>> That seems odd to me. What would be the advantage of pushing that >>> patch if it's a configuration that you can't test? >> At the moment, x86_64-elf doesn't even build for binutils-gdb. It >> fails due to a missing gdb configuration. >> >> And if binutils-gdb doesn't complete successfully, that means gcc >> can't be built for this target. >> >> Jan.. do you build binutils-gdb and gcc for this target? > I didn't build it until a minute ago, just x86_64-linux was on the > list. It's added now, so let's wait for the first build to take place > and see how well that works. This is the patch I posted before I dragged you into this. It includes both -elf and -rtems targets. If you use this, just drop the -rtems target. I was just experimenting and realized the -elf target didn't build. With this, it built. $ git diff gdb diff --git a/gdb/configure.tgt b/gdb/configure.tgt index 8feda7c..bd03600 100644 --- a/gdb/configure.tgt +++ b/gdb/configure.tgt @@ -664,6 +664,9 @@ x86_64-*-freebsd* | x86_64-*-kfreebsd*-gnu) i387-tdep.o i386bsd-tdep.o i386fbsd-tdep.o \ bsd-uthread.o fbsd-tdep.o solib-svr4.o" ;; +x86_64-*-elf* | x86_64-*-rtems*) + gdb_target_obs="amd64-tdep.o i386-tdep.o i387-tdep.o i386bsd-tdep.o" + ;; x86_64-*-mingw* | x86_64-*-cygwin*) # Target: MingW/amd64 gdb_target_obs="amd64-tdep.o amd64-windows-tdep.o \ > MfG, JBG > -- Joel Sherrill, Ph.D. Director of Research & Development joel.sherrill@OARcorp.com On-Line Applications Research Ask me about RTEMS: a free RTOS Huntsville AL 35805 Support Available (256) 722-9985