Re: Problems with recent expat/gdb changes

[Bryan Hundven <bryanhundven@gmail.com>]

Trevor,

On 6/5/13 3:44 AM, "Trevor Woerner" <twoerner@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 4:18 AM, Bryan Hundven <bryanhundven@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>> On 6/4/13 10:28 PM, "Daniel Price" <daniel.price@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>This is on a system where libexpat-dev / -devel isn't installed.
>>>
>>>It seems to me that there's an issue where, despite requesting static
>>>cross-gdb, crosstool-ng
>>> is expecting libexpat to be on the host
>>>system
>>
>> There is definitely some funkyness with expat being needed to be built
>> here.
>
>
>Some target boards, such as the boards from ST, send their details
>(memory areas, register info, etc) to the host via XML (i.e. when
>using st-link). Therefore there are times when a cross-gdb needs expat
>to process this incoming information:
>
>http://sourceware.org/ml/crossgcc/2013-03/msg00005.html
>
>I'm not trying to say this shouldn't be configurable or that expat
>handling shouldn't be broken out into its own script; I'm just
>pointing out that there are valid times when someone would want expat
>included in gdb-cross.
>
>Best regards,
>    Trevor

The "funkiness" (now with spell check) that I was talking about is that
expat was only built for native gdb.
My suggestion is _that_ is what is odd. So now I'm just being clear that
we are in agreement ;)

The other part of the "funkiness" was while I was reading through
300-gdb.sh, I can see parts of it that need updating.
So fixing 300-gdb.sh to build expat and gdb for cross_gdb might be a
little more work.

-Bryan



--
For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq