From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17337 invoked by alias); 7 Nov 2005 22:59:42 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 17328 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Nov 2005 22:59:39 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Mon, 07 Nov 2005 22:59:39 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1EZFxh-0007oJ-W6; Mon, 07 Nov 2005 17:59:38 -0500 Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 22:59:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Mark Kettenis Cc: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFC] The never ending 32-bit vs. 64-bit blues Message-ID: <20051107225937.GA29930@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Mark Kettenis , gdb@sourceware.org References: <200511072245.jA7MjnIL005849@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200511072245.jA7MjnIL005849@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-SW-Source: 2005-11/txt/msg00183.txt.bz2 On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 11:45:49PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote: > In the past we have had a lot of bug reports from people trying to > debug 64-bit programs with a native 32-bit gdb. As far as I know we > don't support any native configuration that allows this. I've never > quite managed to come up with a satisfactory solution to deal with > this. Here's an attempt to deal with it by making configure complain. > > Any opinions about this? For the situation as you've stated it, I don't agree. Not only did Richard post some PPC Linux patches to make this work, I'll have patches for it for MIPS Linux shortly; I've done all the kernel bits already and most of the testing. The patch as you've posted it, however, isn't really very useful for that goal. But it does seem useful for another. When you build a 32-bit PowerPC debugger you should be configuring it for powerpc-linux; if you configure it for powerpc64-linux but use -m32, you're likely to get pretty surprising results. So I have no problem with the patch itself :-) -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery, LLC