From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21631 invoked by alias); 11 Mar 2015 18:01:25 -0000 Mailing-List: contact insight-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: insight-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 21614 invoked by uid 89); 11 Mar 2015 18:01:24 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 11 Mar 2015 18:01:22 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t2BI1IsT022266 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 11 Mar 2015 14:01:18 -0400 Received: from valrhona.uglyboxes.com (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t2BI1GMM004539 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 11 Mar 2015 14:01:17 -0400 Message-ID: <550082EC.1050508@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2015 18:01:00 -0000 From: Keith Seitz User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: =?windows-1252?Q?Marco_Aur=E9lio_da_Cruz?= , insight@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Status of insight/gdbtk References: <547B8C3C.20102@aldan.algebra.com> <54FDDA6A.20808@daruma.com.br> <54FF34A6.9050100@daruma.com.br> <55004D46.60603@daruma.com.br> In-Reply-To: <55004D46.60603@daruma.com.br> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-q1/txt/msg00010.txt.bz2 On 03/11/2015 07:12 AM, Marco Aurélio da Cruz wrote: > On 03/10/2015 03:48 PM, Keith Seitz wrote: >> Does your repository have patches/binutils-gdb/003-tclconfig.patch? If >> so, make sure that all the files were regenerated properly. You can >> search for "usrlibdir" in gdb/configure to check. If it isn't in >> there, your configure files were not regenerated to include the fix. > > The pach file was correctly applied to "bundle" folder before compiling. Does /usr/lib64/tclConfig.sh exist? [This is where the file lives on my Fedora 21 box, which I don't think is any different from Fedora 20.] When configure complains that "WARNING: Can't find Tcl configuration definitions," this means that it is unable to locate this file. The patch I referred to earlier changes configure to look in the following directories: ${prefix}/lib, /usr/local/lib, /usr/contrib/lib, /usr/lib, ${usrlibdir}, ${usrlibdir}/tcl[[8-9]].[[0-9]], and ${usrlibdir}/tcl[[8-9]].[[0-9]]* where prefix is given by the configure option "--prefix" and usrlibdir is computed by configure. ["/usr/lib" on 32-bit architectures, "/usr/lib32" with "-m32" on 64-bit architectures, and "/usr/lib64" on 64-bit architectures] tclConfig.sh is supplied by the tcl-devel package on Fedora. Keith