From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 7E6293858C52; Sat, 19 Nov 2022 09:50:52 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 7E6293858C52 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1668851452; bh=fdMqydr1bwNsFweJHxTXAUKyPuXd3w9q0fA2NWCpZDg=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=spWvDnYY2YVvKx9QMMNDDYcplTSS+0D1J6wDXhLCoCYaBY/RtFgNeZvqVjhWG2Lm/ GfQpY7I7jxCumK/jj4DD1psQkoJJ6dV+MuYckE7w01xuJmDJEupaMBGrD3TmHG9fl/ 0vQnV0FbXfhAyZtclnxp4Hyz8ZZIPom5qUqmmz4E= From: "vries at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gdb-prs@sourceware.org Subject: [Bug tdep/29804] [gdb/tdep, vax] Remove gdbarch_deprecated_function_start_offset Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2022 09:50:51 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gdb X-Bugzilla-Component: tdep X-Bugzilla-Version: HEAD X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: vries at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at sourceware dot org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D29804 --- Comment #6 from Tom de Vries --- (In reply to Maciej W. Rozycki from comment #5) > My VAX box is up and running, however I note that we have no `gdbserver' > for VAX/NetBSD and I have no TCL/Expect/DejaGNU installed there. Native > testing would take forever anyway. Given that we do have NetBSD backends > in `gdbserver' already perhaps it'll be the easiest if we add support to > the VAX target there. I'll see what I can do, but it may take a while. Thanks for looking into this. A setup that might also work and doesn't require gdbserver is remote host+target, which runs tcl/expect/dejagnu on a some local machine (build role), and runs compiler, gdb and target execs on a remote machine (host/ta= rget role). But I suppose it would run into the same "would take forever" probl= em as native testing. It all makes me wonder how this target used to be validated. Maybe done in= a time when the testsuite was smaller, and took significantly less time to execute. Or perhaps a subset of the testsuite was taken and deemed sufficie= nt. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.=