From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11522 invoked by alias); 10 Aug 2003 09:36:09 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 11502 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2003 09:36:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO steve.softier.local) (62.90.245.250) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 10 Aug 2003 09:36:07 -0000 Received: from steve.softier.local (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by steve.softier.local (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h7A9a6il016957 for ; Sun, 10 Aug 2003 12:36:06 +0300 Received: (from steve@localhost) by steve.softier.local (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id h7A9a5mc016955; Sun, 10 Aug 2003 12:36:05 +0300 X-Authentication-Warning: steve.softier.local: steve set sender to xyzzy@hotpop.com using -f Subject: Re: Binutils and GDB From: Stephen Biggs To: GDB list In-Reply-To: <20030807135228.GB28000@nevyn.them.org> References: <1060171527.9735.23.camel@steve.softier.local> <20030806125353.GA24354@nevyn.them.org> <1060253680.9735.28.camel@steve.softier.local> <20030807135228.GB28000@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2003 09:36:00 -0000 Message-Id: <1060508164.15800.15.camel@steve.softier.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2003-08/txt/msg00122.txt.bz2 On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 16:52, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 01:54:39PM +0300, Stephen Biggs wrote: > > On Wed, 2003-08-06 at 15:53, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 03:05:27PM +0300, Stephen Biggs wrote: > > > > Greetings all, > > > > > > > > I apologize for what will probably seem a hopelessly clueless and newbie > > > > question, but I am stuck, so here goes: > > > > > > > > I notice that the GDB source tree has a lot of what seems to be almost > > > > identical code in common with the binutils source tree. I have made > > > > some changes to the binutils 2.14 source tree, specifically in the BFD > > > > and opcodes directories that I wish to integrate into GDB. How do I do > > > > this with the minimum amount of effort? Is there a way to tell the GDB > > > > configure to not configure the GDB's bfd, rather use another already > > > > built BFD library? How, if so? > > > > > > No, GDB can't use the system BFD. I recommend just applying the patch. > > > The directory is common to both projects, but gdb and binutils branch > > > at different times. > > > > > But, this is a big mess, no? That means that any changes in the system > > binutils BFD have to be reflected in the GDB BFD and back-patched, which > > they seem NOT to be... how does this work at all? > > Eh? > > The master sources for binutils and GDB live in the same CVS > repository. So the masters are always in sync. Distributors have to > patch both copies if they need local patches - but in general, they > don't. An example off the top of my head is the change in the latest version (or a couple of versions before, I don't know exactly) of the BFD where all references to "boolean" were changed to "bfd_boolean" and "true/false" to "TRUE/FALSE". This did NOT make it into the GDB version and it is a big change for portability, isn't it? I don't understand how you can say that the masters are always in sync?