This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

[commit] Temp hack to keep arm-elf building


Richard,

I've checked this in so that arm-elf at least builds. See my earlier post for a possible real fix (check things are consistent and then warn when they are not).

Andrew
2003-11-22  Andrew Cagney  <cagney@redhat.com>

	* remote-rdp.c: Update copyright.
	(rdp_init): #if 0 references to "target_byte_order".

Index: remote-rdp.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/remote-rdp.c,v
retrieving revision 1.34
diff -u -r1.34 remote-rdp.c
--- remote-rdp.c	11 Jun 2003 13:16:28 -0000	1.34
+++ remote-rdp.c	22 Nov 2003 15:18:19 -0000
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 /* Remote debugging for the ARM RDP interface.
 
-   Copyright 1994, 1995, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002 Free Software
-   Foundation, Inc.
+   Copyright 1994, 1995, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003 Free
+   Software Foundation, Inc.
 
    This file is part of GDB.
 
@@ -352,11 +352,29 @@
 		  case SERIAL_TIMEOUT:
 		    break;
 		  case RDP_RES_VALUE_LITTLE_ENDIAN:
+#if 0
+		    /* FIXME: cagney/2003-11-22: Ever since the ARM
+                       was multi-arched (in 2002-02-08), this
+                       assignment has had no effect.  There needs to
+                       be some sort of check/decision based on the
+                       current architecture's byte-order vs the remote
+                       target's byte order.  For the moment disable
+                       the assignment to keep things building.  */
 		    target_byte_order = BFD_ENDIAN_LITTLE;
+#endif
 		    sync = 1;
 		    break;
 		  case RDP_RES_VALUE_BIG_ENDIAN:
+#if 0
+		    /* FIXME: cagney/2003-11-22: Ever since the ARM
+                       was multi-arched (in 2002-02-08), this
+                       assignment has had no effect.  There needs to
+                       be some sort of check/decision based on the
+                       current architecture's byte-order vs the remote
+                       target's byte order.  For the moment disable
+                       the assignment to keep things building.  */
 		    target_byte_order = BFD_ENDIAN_BIG;
+#endif
 		    sync = 1;
 		    break;
 		  default:

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]