This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.cygnus.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: include/elf/hppa.h in gdb 4.18
- To: Jeffrey A Law <law@cygnus.com>
- Subject: Re: include/elf/hppa.h in gdb 4.18
- From: <joel@OARcorp.com>
- Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 15:19:08 -0500 (CDT)
- cc: binutils@sourceware.cygnus.com
On Mon, 21 Jun 1999, Jeffrey A Law wrote:
>
> In message <Pine.LNX.4.10.9906211444540.30178-100000@oar3remote>you write:
> > > Don't even try to use the PA ELF tools right now. They're under major
> > > reorganization.
> >
> > OK. I was just trying to update the gdb RTEMS patch to 4.18.
> If you're just trying to get up to gdb-4.18 you can probably make a little
> tweak or two. For some reason I thought you were trying to get the
> mainline code building. You can probably delete the offending code in your
> gdb-4.18 rtems patch.
OK. I have not checked it yet but my hunch is that hppa1.1-elf would not
build in gdb 4.18. So far I have not found another example that looked
like that same enumerated type. I will try to build hppa1.1-elf just to
make sure though and report on that.
> > > I'd forgotten RTEMS depended on this stuff. Ugh.
> >
> > The RTEMS target is not much more than an alias. If I need to change to
> > basing it on another target, it is not a big deal. Just let me know what
> > the best embedded hppa1.1 target is once this settles out again.
> I doubt you'll need to change it. We're just going to have to create a lot of
> construction debris in the PA ELF code for a while.
>
> I'll be primarily concentrating on 64bit ELF, but it's going to have serious
> impact on the 32bit ELF tools. The Linux folks are going to be beating on the
> 32bit ELF tools (hopefully in parallel).
The hppa is not the most popular RTEMS target. :) So I am not going to
lose much sleep over it right now.
--joel