gdb hangs on a 486

gdb hangs on a 486

[CBFalconer]

I have been trying out gdb in Cygwin, and found it to hang and/or
crash under W98, running on a 486.  The output of gdb --version
is:

> $ gdb --version
> GNU gdb 5.0 (20010428-3)
> Copyright 2001 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
> GDB is free software, covered by the GNU General Public License, and you are
> welcome to change it and/or distribute copies of it under certain conditions.
> Type "show copying" to see the conditions.
> There is absolutely no warranty for GDB.  Type "show warranty" for details.
> This GDB was configured as "i686-pc-cygwin".
                              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This appears unwarranted.  I would have assumed gdb would test and
adapt itself to the processor on which it is running.

The whole system was downloaded through setup within the past 20
days.  Gdb came up in a windowed rather than command line
version.  After the hang the mouse was dead and the system needed
rebooting.  I normally can run for weeks without reboots.

Under DJGPP I am running gdb 5.1.1, with no apparent
difficulties.  There the configuration says "i386-pc-msdosdjgpp"

-- 
Chuck F (cbfalconer@yahoo.com) (cbfalconer@worldnet.att.net)
   Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
   <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>  USE worldnet address!


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: gdb hangs on a 486

[Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc)]

At 11:13 PM 10/30/2002, CBFalconer wrote:
>I have been trying out gdb in Cygwin, and found it to hang and/or
>crash under W98, running on a 486.  The output of gdb --version
>is:
>
> > $ gdb --version
> > GNU gdb 5.0 (20010428-3)
> > Copyright 2001 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
> > GDB is free software, covered by the GNU General Public License, and you are
> > welcome to change it and/or distribute copies of it under certain conditions.
> > Type "show copying" to see the conditions.
> > There is absolutely no warranty for GDB.  Type "show warranty" for details.
> > This GDB was configured as "i686-pc-cygwin".
>                               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>This appears unwarranted.  I would have assumed gdb would test and
>adapt itself to the processor on which it is running.


At this point, I think most (all?) Cygwin packages are configured like this.
Whether or not that's true, it's not unwarranted.  There's good reason to 
make use of the newer architectures' capabilities.



>The whole system was downloaded through setup within the past 20
>days.  Gdb came up in a windowed rather than command line
>version.  After the hang the mouse was dead and the system needed
>rebooting.  I normally can run for weeks without reboots.


gdb -nw



>Under DJGPP I am running gdb 5.1.1, with no apparent
>difficulties.  There the configuration says "i386-pc-msdosdjgpp"



Sounds like you may want to get the source, reconfigure, and build your
own version targeting i386 or i486.




Larry Hall                              lhall@rfk.com
RFK Partners, Inc.                      http://www.rfk.com
838 Washington Street                   (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office
Holliston, MA 01746                     (508) 893-9889 - FAX


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: gdb hangs on a 486

[CBFalconer]

"Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc)" wrote:
> 
> At 11:13 PM 10/30/2002, CBFalconer wrote:
> >I have been trying out gdb in Cygwin, and found it to hang and/or
> >crash under W98, running on a 486.  The output of gdb --version
> >is:
> >
... snip ...
> > > This GDB was configured as "i686-pc-cygwin".
> >                               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >This appears unwarranted.  I would have assumed gdb would test and
> >adapt itself to the processor on which it is running.
> 
> At this point, I think most (all?) Cygwin packages are configured
> like this. Whether or not that's true, it's not unwarranted. There's 
> good reason to make use of the newer architectures' capabilities.

I can easily believe that.  It seems very poor practice to make
these assumptions without checking them somewhere and generating a
warning.  Such things can go in initialization or loading code.

... snip ...
> 
> gdb -nw
> 

Are you saying that the problem is limited to the GUI interface? 
Is this known, or just a guess?

> 
> Sounds like you may want to get the source, reconfigure, and build
> your own version targeting i386 or i486.

A non-trivial job, especially if the very tools are suspect.

-- 
Chuck F (cbfalconer@yahoo.com) (cbfalconer@worldnet.att.net)
   Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
   <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>  USE worldnet address!



--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: gdb hangs on a 486

[Christopher Faylor]

On Thu, Oct 31, 2002 at 08:38:35AM -0500, Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc) wrote:
>At 11:13 PM 10/30/2002, CBFalconer wrote:
>>I have been trying out gdb in Cygwin, and found it to hang and/or
>>crash under W98, running on a 486.  The output of gdb --version
>>is:
>>
>> > $ gdb --version
>> > GNU gdb 5.0 (20010428-3)
>> > Copyright 2001 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
>> > GDB is free software, covered by the GNU General Public License, and you are
>> > welcome to change it and/or distribute copies of it under certain conditions.
>> > Type "show copying" to see the conditions.
>> > There is absolutely no warranty for GDB.  Type "show warranty" for details.
>> > This GDB was configured as "i686-pc-cygwin".
>>                               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>This appears unwarranted.  I would have assumed gdb would test and
>>adapt itself to the processor on which it is running.
>
>At this point, I think most (all?) Cygwin packages are configured like this.
>Whether or not that's true, it's not unwarranted.  There's good reason to 
>make use of the newer architectures' capabilities.

The "i686-pc-cygwin" is just a convention.  It doesn't mean anything.
GNU tools built for an i686 target *may* produce binaries that are
reordered for better efficiency on that target but, in this case, I
doubt that is even the case.

Unless someone can point to an actual 686 instruction that is causing
problems, this discussion should die.  The standard "it crashes" or "it
dies" bug reporting technique does not provide any details and
speculating as to the cause with no supporting details is not a useful
endeavor.

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: gdb hangs on a 486

[CBFalconer]

Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 31, 2002 at 08:38:35AM -0500, Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc) wrote:
> >At 11:13 PM 10/30/2002, CBFalconer wrote:
> 
> >>I have been trying out gdb in Cygwin, and found it to hang and/or
> >>crash under W98, running on a 486.  The output of gdb --version
> >>is:
> >>
... snip ...
> >> > This GDB was configured as "i686-pc-cygwin".
> >>                               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >>This appears unwarranted.  I would have assumed gdb would test and
> >>adapt itself to the processor on which it is running.
> >
> >At this point, I think most (all?) Cygwin packages are configured 
> >like this. Whether or not that's true, it's not unwarranted.  
> >There's good reason to make use of the newer architectures' 
> >capabilities.
> 
> The "i686-pc-cygwin" is just a convention.  It doesn't mean anything.
> GNU tools built for an i686 target *may* produce binaries that are
> reordered for better efficiency on that target but, in this case, I
> doubt that is even the case.
> 
> Unless someone can point to an actual 686 instruction that is causing
> problems, this discussion should die.  The standard "it crashes" or
> "it dies" bug reporting technique does not provide any details and
> speculating as to the cause with no supporting details is not a
> useful endeavor.

Unfortunately that is all the data there is.  I don't expect a
magic wand.  The problem is probably in the gui stuff gdb is
calling anyhow.  W98 is not noted for system protection.  However
ignoring it is NOT the right answer.

Maybe a few mirrors should be set aside for systems with other
configurations.

-- 
Chuck F (cbfalconer@yahoo.com) (cbfalconer@worldnet.att.net)
   Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
   <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>  USE worldnet address!



--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: gdb hangs on a 486

[CBFalconer]

Christopher Faylor wrote:
> Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc) wrote:
> >At 11:13 PM 10/30/2002, CBFalconer wrote:
> 
> >>I have been trying out gdb in Cygwin, and found it to hang and/or
> >>crash under W98, running on a 486.  The output of gdb --version
> >>is:
> >>
... snip ...
> >> > This GDB was configured as "i686-pc-cygwin".
> >>                               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >>This appears unwarranted.  I would have assumed gdb would test and
> >>adapt itself to the processor on which it is running.
> >
> >At this point, I think most (all?) Cygwin packages are configured 
> >like this. Whether or not that's true, it's not unwarranted.  
> >There's good reason to make use of the newer architectures' 
> >capabilities.
> 
> The "i686-pc-cygwin" is just a convention.  It doesn't mean anything.
> GNU tools built for an i686 target *may* produce binaries that are
> reordered for better efficiency on that target but, in this case, I
> doubt that is even the case.
> 
> Unless someone can point to an actual 686 instruction that is causing
> problems, this discussion should die.  The standard "it crashes" or
> "it dies" bug reporting technique does not provide any details and
> speculating as to the cause with no supporting details is not a
> useful endeavor.

Unfortunately that is all the data there is.  I don't expect a
magic wand.  The problem is probably in the gui stuff gdb is
calling anyhow.  W98 is not noted for system protection.  However
ignoring it is NOT the right answer.

Maybe a few mirrors should be set aside for systems with other
configurations.

-- 
Chuck F (cbfalconer@yahoo.com) (cbfalconer@worldnet.att.net)
   Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
   <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>  USE worldnet address!

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: gdb hangs on a 486

[Christopher Faylor]

On Thu, Oct 31, 2002 at 06:58:03PM -0500, CBFalconer wrote:
>Unfortunately that is all the data there is.  I don't expect a magic
>wand.  The problem is probably in the gui stuff gdb is calling anyhow.
>W98 is not noted for system protection.  However ignoring it is NOT the
>right answer.

Noting that a string on the screen says "i686", concluding that since
you don't have a i686 this is the cause of all of your problems, and
continuing to hold to that belief after you've been told it is unlikely,
is not the right answer either.

>Maybe a few mirrors should be set aside for systems with other
>configurations.

And now we segue into YA misconception this time it's about how mirrors
work.

What fun.

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: gdb hangs on a 486

[Christopher Faylor]

On Thu, Oct 31, 2002 at 10:10:24PM -0500, CBFalconer wrote:
>Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 31, 2002 at 06:58:03PM -0500, CBFalconer wrote:
>> 
>> >Unfortunately that is all the data there is.  I don't expect a magic
>> >wand.  The problem is probably in the gui stuff gdb is calling anyhow.
>> >W98 is not noted for system protection.  However ignoring it is NOT the
>> >right answer.
>> 
>> Noting that a string on the screen says "i686", concluding that since
>> you don't have a i686 this is the cause of all of your problems, and
>> continuing to hold to that belief after you've been told it is unlikely,
>> is not the right answer either.
>
>I did NOT say that.  I did say, in effect, that I was speculating,
>and in one message that it would be worthwhile to record and
>publicize what a package was compiled for.

The i686 that you have latched onto is meaningless.  Publicizing it in
any way would be pointless.  Every package that I provide is compiled
with that target triplet.  The cygwin DLL is built that way, 'ls' is
built that way, 'bison' is built that way, 'gcc' is built that
way.  The 'i686' just means that it is an Intel x86 CPU.

>> >Maybe a few mirrors should be set aside for systems with other
>> >configurations.
>> 
>> And now we segue into YA misconception this time it's about how
>> mirrors work.
>> 
>> What fun.
>
>Maybe the word is wrong, but such a separation (assuming that
>there is a reason to do it at all) would make matching packages to
>machine capabilities trivial.  The user, via setup or the
>equivalent, selects a machine type, and the appropriate list of
>'mirrors' appears.  Each such 'mirror' does its updating from an
>appropriate set of source directories.

Right.  You don't understand how mirrors work.  Mirrors are independent
entities who just take periodic snapshots of the cygwin release
directory at sources.redhat.com.  There is no coordination on this side.
There is no traffic cop saying "You! Over there! You mirror that
directory!"

I have no idea why you are still suggesting this after I have repeatedly
said that this was a nonissue.  Hence the "sarcasm".

>I fail to see the usefulness of sarcasm here.  Or should I assume
>that, like Microsoft, perfection has already been attained and
>that questioning is futile?  Have you met Dan Pop yet?  He is very
>knowledgeable.

If I was just like Microsoft, I'd just be ignoring you whether you had
a good suggestion or (like this one) an ill-considered one.

cgf
--
Please do not send me personal email with cygwin questions or observations.
Use the resources at http://cygwin.com/ .

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: gdb hangs on a 486

[J. David Bryan]

On 30 Oct 2002 at 23:13, CBFalconer wrote:

> I have been trying out gdb in Cygwin, and found it to hang and/or crash
> under W98, running on a 486. 

I tried gdb (the version you cited) with the windowed interface on a 486 
running NT 4.0, and it appeared to work fine on a simple "hello, world" 
test program.  Do you have steps to reproduce your problem?

Regarding the "i686" configuration, I believe Randall Schulz cited the 
appropriate part of the gcc manual, i.e., unless specifically directed to 
do so, the compiler will output i386 instructions.  I don't have a 486 
datasheet handy, but I'm reasonably certain that the 486 had an illegal 
instruction trap (the 386 did), so if a Pentium-only instruction was 
encountered, you'd encounter an exception.  Are you getting illegal 
instruction exceptions?

As a data point, I've run Cygwin on a 486 system for some years and never 
had a problem related to the CPU configuration.

                                      -- Dave


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: gdb hangs on a 486

[CBFalconer]

"lhall@pop.ma.ultranet.com" wrote:
> 
... snip ...
> 
> Dead thread now?  I hope so.  I'm out. :-)

Dead.

-- 
Chuck F (cbfalconer@yahoo.com) (cbfalconer@worldnet.att.net)
   Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
   <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>  USE worldnet address!




--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: gdb hangs on a 486

[lhall]

Ah, finally a good soul with an honest-to-goodness data point!
Who knew there were actually 486s still around. ;-)  Seems like 
this lends credence to Chris' arguments (did he need some? :-) )  

Chuck, if you're seeing some problem and want to try to get it 
resolved, you need to push into a different area to track it 
down, assuming it's something you want to pursue.

Dead thread now?  I hope so.  I'm out. :-)

Larry

Original Message:
-----------------
From: J. David Bryan dbryan@bcpl.net
Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2002 10:47:10 -0500
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: gdb hangs on a 486


On 30 Oct 2002 at 23:13, CBFalconer wrote:

> I have been trying out gdb in Cygwin, and found it to hang and/or crash
> under W98, running on a 486. 

I tried gdb (the version you cited) with the windowed interface on a 486 
running NT 4.0, and it appeared to work fine on a simple "hello, world" 
test program.  Do you have steps to reproduce your problem?

Regarding the "i686" configuration, I believe Randall Schulz cited the 
appropriate part of the gcc manual, i.e., unless specifically directed to 
do so, the compiler will output i386 instructions.  I don't have a 486 
datasheet handy, but I'm reasonably certain that the 486 had an illegal 
instruction trap (the 386 did), so if a Pentium-only instruction was 
encountered, you'd encounter an exception.  Are you getting illegal 
instruction exceptions?

As a data point, I've run Cygwin on a 486 system for some years and never 
had a problem related to the CPU configuration.

                                      -- Dave


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/


--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .



--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: gdb hangs on a 486

[Christopher Faylor]

On Thu, Oct 31, 2002 at 02:46:58PM -0500, Scott Prive wrote:
>>Thanks for the clarification Scott.
>
>NP.  When someone contributes a patch, I'll be sure to transfer those
>thanks since I don't deserve them (suggestions are *always* free..) ;-)

Is anyone reading my previous message?  This SHOULD NOT BE AN ISSUE.
There is no need for a patch.

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

RE: gdb hangs on a 486

[Scott Prive]

> Thanks for the clarification Scott.
> 
> Larry

NP. When someone contributes a patch, I'll be sure to transfer those thanks since I don't deserve them (suggestions are *always* free..)   ;-)


> 
> Original Message:
> -----------------
> From: Scott Prive Scott.Prive@storigen.com
> Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 13:30:41 -0500
> To: lhall@rfk.com, cbfalconer@worldnet.att.net, cygwin@cygwin.com
> Subject: RE: gdb hangs on a 486
> 
> 
> Agreed. CPU specific-packages for obsolete platforms are not 
> needed, and my
> remark was not intended to suggest something far less than this. 
> 
> What I meant was, in SETUP.EXE provide some warning to the 
> end user that
> the packages they have selected will not run on their CPU. 
> Allow them to
> continue if they acknowledge the warning. 
> 
> Imagine waiting for install to complete (probably on 56K), 
> and then realize
> it's i586+ only. Having a check in the installer means you 
> only "wasted" a
> ~250Kb download.
> 
> -Scott
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: lhall@pop.ma.ultranet.com [mailto:lhall@pop.ma.ultranet.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 12:32 PM
> > To: Scott Prive; cbfalconer@worldnet.att.net; cygwin@cygwin.com
> > Subject: RE: gdb hangs on a 486
> > 
> > 
> > Hm, an interesting thought.  This would require packages to 
> > provide some information, probably in their setup.hint, to 
> > indicate their configuration target.  Could work.  But unless
> > there are packages that are configured specifically for other 
> > than the default "i686", I don't think it would be a feature 
> > that would get much use.  But I'm willing to be proven wrong on 
> > this. :-)
> > 
> > Larry
> > 
> > Original Message:
> > -----------------
> > From: Scott Prive Scott.Prive@storigen.com
> > Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 10:06:22 -0500
> > To: lhall@rfk.com, cbfalconer@worldnet.att.net, cygwin@cygwin.com
> > Subject: RE: gdb hangs on a 486
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > At this point, I think most (all?) Cygwin packages are 
> > > configured like this.
> > > Whether or not that's true, it's not unwarranted.  There's 
> > > good reason to 
> > > make use of the newer architectures' capabilities.
> > 
> > At the risk of asking for Yet Another Feature ... and I'm 
> > thinking out loud
> > more than anything else... it would be friendly for the setup 
> > utility to do
> > a CPU check vs. the packages you selected.
> > 
> > I know.. "patches gratefully accepted" 
> > (You wouldn't want a patch in C from me. trust me :-)
> > 
> > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > >The whole system was downloaded through setup within the past 20
> > > >days.  Gdb came up in a windowed rather than command line
> > > >version.  After the hang the mouse was dead and the system needed
> > > >rebooting.  I normally can run for weeks without reboots.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > gdb -nw
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > >Under DJGPP I am running gdb 5.1.1, with no apparent
> > > >difficulties.  There the configuration says "i386-pc-msdosdjgpp"
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Sounds like you may want to get the source, reconfigure, and 
> > > build your
> > > own version targeting i386 or i486.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Larry Hall                              lhall@rfk.com
> > > RFK Partners, Inc.                      http://www.rfk.com
> > > 838 Washington Street                   (508) 893-9779 - 
> RFK Office
> > > Holliston, MA 01746                     (508) 893-9889 - FAX
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --
> > > Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
> > > Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
> > > Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
> > > FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > mail2web - Check your email from the web at
> > http://mail2web.com/ .
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> mail2web - Check your email from the web at
> http://mail2web.com/ .
> 
> 
> 
> 

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

RE: gdb hangs on a 486

[lhall]

OK, I guess I read too much into your suggestion.  Having one
test in setup.exe is easier than gathering this information from
the packages (which is really flawed anyway since no package 
could say it was was built for an architecture that it's 
dependencies didn't support - which pretty much nullifies the 
whole thing).  A change to setup to check this is probably the 
best and easiest way to protect the user (from himself? ;-) )
Documentation would also do the trick, although it's less fool-
proof.  OK, so there would be a relatively simple solution for
this, at least as far as providing a warning goes.  So, if anyone
is concerned enough about this problem such that they want to 
implement a solution, I think this qualifies.

Thanks for the clarification Scott.

Larry

Original Message:
-----------------
From: Scott Prive Scott.Prive@storigen.com
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 13:30:41 -0500
To: lhall@rfk.com, cbfalconer@worldnet.att.net, cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: RE: gdb hangs on a 486


Agreed. CPU specific-packages for obsolete platforms are not needed, and my
remark was not intended to suggest something far less than this. 

What I meant was, in SETUP.EXE provide some warning to the end user that
the packages they have selected will not run on their CPU. Allow them to
continue if they acknowledge the warning. 

Imagine waiting for install to complete (probably on 56K), and then realize
it's i586+ only. Having a check in the installer means you only "wasted" a
~250Kb download.

-Scott




> -----Original Message-----
> From: lhall@pop.ma.ultranet.com [mailto:lhall@pop.ma.ultranet.com]
> Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 12:32 PM
> To: Scott Prive; cbfalconer@worldnet.att.net; cygwin@cygwin.com
> Subject: RE: gdb hangs on a 486
> 
> 
> Hm, an interesting thought.  This would require packages to 
> provide some information, probably in their setup.hint, to 
> indicate their configuration target.  Could work.  But unless
> there are packages that are configured specifically for other 
> than the default "i686", I don't think it would be a feature 
> that would get much use.  But I'm willing to be proven wrong on 
> this. :-)
> 
> Larry
> 
> Original Message:
> -----------------
> From: Scott Prive Scott.Prive@storigen.com
> Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 10:06:22 -0500
> To: lhall@rfk.com, cbfalconer@worldnet.att.net, cygwin@cygwin.com
> Subject: RE: gdb hangs on a 486
> 
> 
> 
> > At this point, I think most (all?) Cygwin packages are 
> > configured like this.
> > Whether or not that's true, it's not unwarranted.  There's 
> > good reason to 
> > make use of the newer architectures' capabilities.
> 
> At the risk of asking for Yet Another Feature ... and I'm 
> thinking out loud
> more than anything else... it would be friendly for the setup 
> utility to do
> a CPU check vs. the packages you selected.
> 
> I know.. "patches gratefully accepted" 
> (You wouldn't want a patch in C from me. trust me :-)
> 
> 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > >The whole system was downloaded through setup within the past 20
> > >days.  Gdb came up in a windowed rather than command line
> > >version.  After the hang the mouse was dead and the system needed
> > >rebooting.  I normally can run for weeks without reboots.
> > 
> > 
> > gdb -nw
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > >Under DJGPP I am running gdb 5.1.1, with no apparent
> > >difficulties.  There the configuration says "i386-pc-msdosdjgpp"
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Sounds like you may want to get the source, reconfigure, and 
> > build your
> > own version targeting i386 or i486.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Larry Hall                              lhall@rfk.com
> > RFK Partners, Inc.                      http://www.rfk.com
> > 838 Washington Street                   (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office
> > Holliston, MA 01746                     (508) 893-9889 - FAX
> > 
> > 
> > --
> > Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
> > Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
> > Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
> > FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> mail2web - Check your email from the web at
> http://mail2web.com/ .
> 
> 
> 
> 

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .



--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

RE: gdb hangs on a 486

[Scott Prive]

Agreed. CPU specific-packages for obsolete platforms are not needed, and my remark was not intended to suggest something far less than this. 

What I meant was, in SETUP.EXE provide some warning to the end user that the packages they have selected will not run on their CPU. Allow them to continue if they acknowledge the warning. 

Imagine waiting for install to complete (probably on 56K), and then realize it's i586+ only. Having a check in the installer means you only "wasted" a ~250Kb download.

-Scott




> -----Original Message-----
> From: lhall@pop.ma.ultranet.com [mailto:lhall@pop.ma.ultranet.com]
> Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 12:32 PM
> To: Scott Prive; cbfalconer@worldnet.att.net; cygwin@cygwin.com
> Subject: RE: gdb hangs on a 486
> 
> 
> Hm, an interesting thought.  This would require packages to 
> provide some information, probably in their setup.hint, to 
> indicate their configuration target.  Could work.  But unless
> there are packages that are configured specifically for other 
> than the default "i686", I don't think it would be a feature 
> that would get much use.  But I'm willing to be proven wrong on 
> this. :-)
> 
> Larry
> 
> Original Message:
> -----------------
> From: Scott Prive Scott.Prive@storigen.com
> Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 10:06:22 -0500
> To: lhall@rfk.com, cbfalconer@worldnet.att.net, cygwin@cygwin.com
> Subject: RE: gdb hangs on a 486
> 
> 
> 
> > At this point, I think most (all?) Cygwin packages are 
> > configured like this.
> > Whether or not that's true, it's not unwarranted.  There's 
> > good reason to 
> > make use of the newer architectures' capabilities.
> 
> At the risk of asking for Yet Another Feature ... and I'm 
> thinking out loud
> more than anything else... it would be friendly for the setup 
> utility to do
> a CPU check vs. the packages you selected.
> 
> I know.. "patches gratefully accepted" 
> (You wouldn't want a patch in C from me. trust me :-)
> 
> 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > >The whole system was downloaded through setup within the past 20
> > >days.  Gdb came up in a windowed rather than command line
> > >version.  After the hang the mouse was dead and the system needed
> > >rebooting.  I normally can run for weeks without reboots.
> > 
> > 
> > gdb -nw
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > >Under DJGPP I am running gdb 5.1.1, with no apparent
> > >difficulties.  There the configuration says "i386-pc-msdosdjgpp"
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Sounds like you may want to get the source, reconfigure, and 
> > build your
> > own version targeting i386 or i486.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Larry Hall                              lhall@rfk.com
> > RFK Partners, Inc.                      http://www.rfk.com
> > 838 Washington Street                   (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office
> > Holliston, MA 01746                     (508) 893-9889 - FAX
> > 
> > 
> > --
> > Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
> > Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
> > Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
> > FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> mail2web - Check your email from the web at
> http://mail2web.com/ .
> 
> 
> 
> 

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: gdb hangs on a 486

[Randall R Schulz]

Larry,

At 09:54 2002-10-31, you wrote:

>...
>
>
> >> Sounds like you may want to get the source, reconfigure, and build
> >> your own version targeting i386 or i486.
> >
> >A non-trivial job, especially if the very tools are suspect.
>
>
>A potentially non-trivial job, yes, depending on your skills and
>experience building packages.  I'm not sure what you're referring to
>by "the very tools are suspect".  These tools have been around for a
>long time.  They worked when these architectures were the default
>configuration.  It shouldn't be too hard to get them working on
>those targets now.  If you're referring to the fact that the tools
>don't check if the run-time environment matches the configuration
>environment on start-up, I think labeling the tools as "suspect" for
>this oversight is a little extreme.  But I may be missing your meaning.

It does seem there's a bootstrapping problem. If Chuck has only a 486 
machine and the only binaries he can get are compiled for post-Pentium 
architectures, how will he build compilers and binutils for his hardware?


>Larry


Randall Schulz
Mountain View, CA USA


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: gdb hangs on a 486

[lhall]

>From: CBFalconer cbfalconer@yahoo.com
>Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 11:20:45 -0500
>To: cygwin@cygwin.com
>Subject: Re: gdb hangs on a 486
>
>
>"Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc)" wrote:
>> 
>> At 11:13 PM 10/30/2002, CBFalconer wrote:
>> >I have been trying out gdb in Cygwin, and found it to hang and/or
>> >crash under W98, running on a 486.  The output of gdb --version
>> >is:
>> >
>>... snip ...
>> > > This GDB was configured as "i686-pc-cygwin".
>> >                               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> >This appears unwarranted.  I would have assumed gdb would test and
>> >adapt itself to the processor on which it is running.
>> 
>> At this point, I think most (all?) Cygwin packages are configured
>> like this. Whether or not that's true, it's not unwarranted. There's 
>> good reason to make use of the newer architectures' capabilities.
>
>I can easily believe that.  It seems very poor practice to make
>these assumptions without checking them somewhere and generating a
>warning.  Such things can go in initialization or loading code.


Sure.  I doubt many programs actually do architecture checks as part
of their startup though.  If you're arguing that this should be the 
case, I won't contest it.  In a perfect world, this would probably
be the case.  It's a low enough pain-threshold for the majority that 
the lack of this check is not noticed.  But that's a separate issue 
from your point.


>... snip ...
>> 
>> gdb -nw
>> 
>
>Are you saying that the problem is limited to the GUI interface? 
>Is this known, or just a guess?


Actually, no I'm not saying that.  However, you mentioned that gdb 
came up in the GUI version, which I read as preference not to have the
GUI.  That's really all I was pointing out.  It's possible that the 
command line version would cause less windowing/mouse problems though.
I don't expect that the command line version targets i486 while the GUI
targets something later however.


>> 
>> Sounds like you may want to get the source, reconfigure, and build
>> your own version targeting i386 or i486.
>
>A non-trivial job, especially if the very tools are suspect.


A potentially non-trivial job, yes, depending on your skills and 
experience building packages.  I'm not sure what you're referring to
by "the very tools are suspect".  These tools have been around for a
long time.  They worked when these architectures were the default
configuration.  It shouldn't be too hard to get them working on 
those targets now.  If you're referring to the fact that the tools 
don't check if the run-time environment matches the configuration 
environment on start-up, I think labeling the tools as "suspect" for 
this oversight is a little extreme.  But I may be missing your meaning.

Larry

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .



--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

RE: gdb hangs on a 486

[lhall]

Hm, an interesting thought.  This would require packages to 
provide some information, probably in their setup.hint, to 
indicate their configuration target.  Could work.  But unless
there are packages that are configured specifically for other 
than the default "i686", I don't think it would be a feature 
that would get much use.  But I'm willing to be proven wrong on 
this. :-)

Larry

Original Message:
-----------------
From: Scott Prive Scott.Prive@storigen.com
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 10:06:22 -0500
To: lhall@rfk.com, cbfalconer@worldnet.att.net, cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: RE: gdb hangs on a 486



> At this point, I think most (all?) Cygwin packages are 
> configured like this.
> Whether or not that's true, it's not unwarranted.  There's 
> good reason to 
> make use of the newer architectures' capabilities.

At the risk of asking for Yet Another Feature ... and I'm thinking out loud
more than anything else... it would be friendly for the setup utility to do
a CPU check vs. the packages you selected.

I know.. "patches gratefully accepted" 
(You wouldn't want a patch in C from me. trust me :-)


> 
> 
> 
> >The whole system was downloaded through setup within the past 20
> >days.  Gdb came up in a windowed rather than command line
> >version.  After the hang the mouse was dead and the system needed
> >rebooting.  I normally can run for weeks without reboots.
> 
> 
> gdb -nw
> 
> 
> 
> >Under DJGPP I am running gdb 5.1.1, with no apparent
> >difficulties.  There the configuration says "i386-pc-msdosdjgpp"
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds like you may want to get the source, reconfigure, and 
> build your
> own version targeting i386 or i486.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Larry Hall                              lhall@rfk.com
> RFK Partners, Inc.                      http://www.rfk.com
> 838 Washington Street                   (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office
> Holliston, MA 01746                     (508) 893-9889 - FAX
> 
> 
> --
> Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
> Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
> Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
> FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
> 
> 
> 

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .



--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

RE: gdb hangs on a 486

[Scott Prive]

> At this point, I think most (all?) Cygwin packages are 
> configured like this.
> Whether or not that's true, it's not unwarranted.  There's 
> good reason to 
> make use of the newer architectures' capabilities.

At the risk of asking for Yet Another Feature ... and I'm thinking out loud more than anything else... it would be friendly for the setup utility to do a CPU check vs. the packages you selected.

I know.. "patches gratefully accepted" 
(You wouldn't want a patch in C from me. trust me :-)


> 
> 
> 
> >The whole system was downloaded through setup within the past 20
> >days.  Gdb came up in a windowed rather than command line
> >version.  After the hang the mouse was dead and the system needed
> >rebooting.  I normally can run for weeks without reboots.
> 
> 
> gdb -nw
> 
> 
> 
> >Under DJGPP I am running gdb 5.1.1, with no apparent
> >difficulties.  There the configuration says "i386-pc-msdosdjgpp"
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds like you may want to get the source, reconfigure, and 
> build your
> own version targeting i386 or i486.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Larry Hall                              lhall@rfk.com
> RFK Partners, Inc.                      http://www.rfk.com
> 838 Washington Street                   (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office
> Holliston, MA 01746                     (508) 893-9889 - FAX
> 
> 
> --
> Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
> Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
> Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
> FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
> 
> 
> 

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/