This is the mail archive of the
rda@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the rda project.
Re: Realure to build uberbaum tree for m68k-elf
- From: Christopher Faylor <cgf at redhat dot com>
- To: Peter Barada <pbarada at mail dot wm dot sps dot mot dot com>
- Cc: peter at baradas dot org, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, rda at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 11:08:57 -0500
- Subject: Re: Realure to build uberbaum tree for m68k-elf
- References: <20030202221347.C605D98964@baradas.org> <20030202223823.GA13076@redhat.com> <200302031604.h13G4HU26161@hyper.wm.sps.mot.com>
On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 11:04:17AM -0500, Peter Barada wrote:
>
>>>I haven't been ablke to build the uberbaum tree configured with
>>>--target=m68k-elf for the past few days. Previous I had problems with
>>>a missiung tk8.4 directory, and it was suggested by Christopher Faylor
>>>that I remove it. After removing the tix directory and configuring
>>>again, the build fails trying to build the rda part of GDB:
>>>
>>>/home/peter/work/cvs-gnu/uberbaum/rda/lib/gdbsocket.c: In function `gdbsocket_startup':
>>>/home/peter/work/cvs-gnu/uberbaum/rda/lib/gdbsocket.c:191: error: storage size of `sockaddr' isn't known
>>
>>Well, you can remove rda, too, unless you are going to be needing it,
>>which is unlikely.
>
>I thought someone would like to know that it doesn't build
>'out-of-the-box'. If I read rda/lib/gdbsocket.c correctly, I can't
>see how it can build for a embedded target that uses newlib since
>newlib doesn't supply a sockaddr_in definition.
>
>Would it be wrong to suggest that rda should not attempt to build
>itself for any target that requires newlib?
No, I don't think it's wrong. There have been some discussions in the rda
mailing list about this. I've cc'ed this message there.
cgf