[RFC] Suggested ways to remove the need for xm-go32.h

[Andrew Cagney]

> On Thu, Sep 23, 2004 at 08:18:02AM -0700, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> 
>>>> > I don't think that "rb" versus "r" can be autoconf'ed.  The gdb
>>>> > configure script would need to execute a host program to figure out
>>>> > whether "rb" is supported or not, and that won't work if build != host.
>>>> > Or maybe I'm wrong about that and there's some way to do it.
>>
>>> 
>>> I must say I am not convinced that it is such a good idea to support
>>> that setup. I wouldn't bother about this until somebody has a real
>>> interest in that support, and then can step up and maintain it.
>>> In the meantime, we're just letting the best be the enemy of good, and
>>> as a consequence have to find elaborate solutions to problems made more
>>> complex by this requirement.  Intellectually rewarding, but slows down
>>> development.

Yes, definitly.

We've no evidence that we've a real problem here, and hence no evidence 
that a wrapper is needed.  All I see a dig achieving is to flush out 
legacy systems on which GDB no longer builds.  If someone with such a 
legacy system really really needs a modern GDB then I'm sure that 
they'll step up to the challenge of solving this and many other problem.

Lets base this decision on what is, what not might once have been.  And 
lets resist the temptation to add wrapper runtime checks that we can't 
even test (as in with a full working GDB).

> For the previous question of testing, I don't think it's a worthwhile
> requirement; however, it's a very important requirement for build time. 
> I build with --build != --host routinely.  So do a lot of Cygwin folks,
> I think.

You'll need to be more specific.  Which build, which host.  Presumably 
these are all modern hosts and support "rb".

Andrew