PATCH: PR25830: Exclude gdb & gprof for pdp11

PATCH: PR25830: Exclude gdb & gprof for pdp11

[Stephen Casner]

Since gdb and gprof are not supported for the pdp11-*-* target, I'd
like to exclude them from the build to save time (and as a side
benefit, avoid complications with conflicting iconv libraries in some
environments).

-- Steve

--- a/ChangeLog
+++ b/ChangeLog
@@ -1,3 +1,9 @@
+2020-04-17  Stephen Casner  <casner@acm.org>
+
+	PR 25830
+	* configure.ac (noconfigdirs): Exclude gdb & gprof for pdp11.
+	* configure: Rebuild.
+
 2020-03-12  Tom Tromey  <tom@tromey.com>

 	* Makefile.in: Rebuild.
--- a/configure.ac
+++ b/configure.ac
@@ -1117,6 +1117,9 @@ case "${target}" in
     noconfigdirs="$noconfigdirs ld gas gdb gprof sim"
     noconfigdirs="$noconfigdirs $target_libraries"
     ;;
+  pdp11-*-*)
+    noconfigdirs="$noconfigdirs gdb gprof"
+    ;;
   powerpc-*-aix*)
     # copied from rs6000-*-* entry
     noconfigdirs="$noconfigdirs gprof"

Re: PATCH: PR25830: Exclude gdb & gprof for pdp11

[Simon Marchi]

On 2020-04-17 5:35 p.m., Stephen Casner wrote:
> Since gdb and gprof are not supported for the pdp11-*-* target, I'd
> like to exclude them from the build to save time (and as a side
> benefit, avoid complications with conflicting iconv libraries in some
> environments).

From the GDB point of view, this is ok.

Simon

Would you like to be the PDP11 maintainer for the binutils ?

[Nick Clifton]

Hi Stephen,

  Would you be interested in becoming the PDP11 maintainer for the binutils ?
  It would mean that you can self-approve patches that are PDP11 specific.

  Plus it would mean that we would now have someone who cares about the PDP11
  architecture and is interested in making sure that it works and continues
  to work in the future.

  If so then you will need write access to the repository (you may have this
  already - I loose track of these kind of things), and then to make it
  official, please add your name and email to the binutils/MAINTAINERS file.
  The location in the file should be obvious.

Cheers
  Nick

 

Re: Would you like to be the PDP11 maintainer for the binutils ?

[Stephen Casner]

Nick,

>   Would you be interested in becoming the PDP11 maintainer for the binutils ?
>   It would mean that you can self-approve patches that are PDP11 specific.

I could do that.  I am retired so that means I don't need approval
from anyone, but it also means I don't have any company resources to
draw upon.

>   Plus it would mean that we would now have someone who cares about the PDP11
>   architecture and is interested in making sure that it works and continues
>   to work in the future.

So, for example, if someone introduces a new test that fails for the
PDP11 when you do your survey, you'd bring it to my attention?

>   If so then you will need write access to the repository (you may have this
>   already - I loose track of these kind of things), and then to make it
>   official, please add your name and email to the binutils/MAINTAINERS file.
>   The location in the file should be obvious.

I don't have write access, but I will submit a request with your email
as the approver.

In gcc/MAINTAINERS I see a long list of specific ports and individuals
who are maintainers for those ports, but in binutils/MAINTAINERS I did
not see specific ports or individuals listed.

At the instigation of Paul Koning, PDP11 maintainter for gcc, I have
implemented a first crack at pdp11-elf32 so that we might get C++ to
work on the PDP11 (I'm stuck on trying to build up the libraries at
this point).  I also mentioned to you the changes I would like to make
to nm to show addresses as 4 digits for 16-bit targets and to adjust
the spacing according to the selected radix.  What is the convention
to present such changes for review?  Should a PR be filed for each, or
just propose the change with a patch on binutils@sourceware.org?

                                                        -- Steve

Re: Would you like to be the PDP11 maintainer for the binutils ?

[Alan Modra]

On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 05:44:28PM -0700, Stephen Casner wrote:
> In gcc/MAINTAINERS I see a long list of specific ports and individuals
> who are maintainers for those ports, but in binutils/MAINTAINERS I did
> not see specific ports or individuals listed.

Look at MAINTAINERS in the next level down binutils/ dir, where you
find objdump.c for example.

> At the instigation of Paul Koning, PDP11 maintainter for gcc, I have
> implemented a first crack at pdp11-elf32 so that we might get C++ to
> work on the PDP11 (I'm stuck on trying to build up the libraries at
> this point).  I also mentioned to you the changes I would like to make
> to nm to show addresses as 4 digits for 16-bit targets and to adjust
> the spacing according to the selected radix.  What is the convention
> to present such changes for review?  Should a PR be filed for each, or
> just propose the change with a patch on binutils@sourceware.org?

The convention is to post to binutils@sourceware.org, and ping weekly
if you get no response.

-- 
Alan Modra
Australia Development Lab, IBM

Re: Would you like to be the PDP11 maintainer for the binutils ?

[Stephen Casner]

On Wed, 22 Apr 2020, Alan Modra wrote:

> Look at MAINTAINERS in the next level down binutils/ dir, where you
> find objdump.c for example.

Ah, thanks.  I did look at ld/MAINTAINERS, since ld was the motivation
for me to come to binutils, and that just pointed back to the top
level.

                                                        -- Steve

Re: Would you like to be the PDP11 maintainer for the binutils ?

[Nick Clifton]

Hi Stephen,

> So, for example, if someone introduces a new test that fails for the
> PDP11 when you do your survey, you'd bring it to my attention?

If you did not notice it before me, then yes. :-)

Also it is conventional that when we are preparing to make a new release
of the sources I ask the maintainers if they could take a look at their
ports and fix up any testsuite failures that they think they can handle
in the time available.  (Usually two weeks).  It is not a requirement,
just a request to get the sources into the best shape possible.


> I don't have write access, but I will submit a request with your email
> as the approver.

I have seen that and approved your request.

Cheers
  Nick

Re: Would you like to be the PDP11 maintainer for the binutils ?

[Stephen Casner]

On Wed, 22 Apr 2020, Nick Clifton wrote:

> > I don't have write access, but I will submit a request with your email
> > as the approver.
>
> I have seen that and approved your request.

I have added my name in the binutils/MAINTAINERS list and subscribed
to bug-binutils.  I attempted to submit a subscription request for
binutils but the web page returns a 404.

                                                        -- Steve