From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1695 invoked by alias); 17 Aug 2003 14:21:51 -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 1688 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2003 14:21:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 17 Aug 2003 14:21:49 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.20 #1 (Debian)) id 19oOPi-0004Hj-IF for ; Sun, 17 Aug 2003 10:21:46 -0400 Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 14:21:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: GDB list Subject: Re: Binutils and GDB Message-ID: <20030817142146.GA16438@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: GDB list 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> <1060508164.15800.15.camel@steve.softier.local> <20030813235331.GA25134@nevyn.them.org> <1060855469.23318.40.camel@steve.softier.local> <20030814142035.GA3795@nevyn.them.org> <1061106472.9591.1.camel@steve.softier.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1061106472.9591.1.camel@steve.softier.local> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-08/txt/msg00176.txt.bz2 On Sun, Aug 17, 2003 at 10:47:52AM +0300, Stephen Biggs wrote: > On Thu, 2003-08-14 at 17:20, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 01:04:29PM +0300, Stephen Biggs wrote: > > > On Thu, 2003-08-14 at 02:53, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > > > On Sun, Aug 10, 2003 at 12:36:04PM +0300, Stephen Biggs wrote: > > > > > 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? > > > > > > > > It did make it into the GDB version. There is only one master copy! > > > > > > > > You're probably looking at a released version of GDB which was branched > > > > before the change. Without time travel, we can not fix past releases. > > > > > > Yes, ok... thanks. > > > > > > I am using the releases binutils-2.14 and gdb-5.3. > > > > > > So, what I can do is to integrate the gdb directories into my binutils > > > source tree and that should work? > > > > If you want to integrate the two, I always recommend using the CVS > > version of both. > > How about the integrated versions: binutils+gdb, and gdb+binutils... is > there any difference? Will I get the latest updates if I access one of > these? If you're using CVS you'll get the latest updates no matter what, unless you specify a branch. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer