Building today's snapshot of GDB with MinGW

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Christian Biesinger <cbiesinger@google.com>
> Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2020 15:36:50 -0500
> Cc: gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
> 
> > 1. The configure script doesn't allow --with-static-standard-libraries
> > when GDB is built with source-highlight.  Is this limitation going to
> > stay (and if so, why), or could it be lifted?  (I needed to hack the
> > configure script to get past the error message.)
> 
> Looks like this was discussed before at
> https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2020-April/167388.html,
> no real outcome AFAICT

Tom, could you please share your views on this?  You seemed to be
saying there that we must link libstdc++ dynamically to support
exceptions thrown by source-highlight, but could you perhaps add more
details about the reasons?  Also, do the problems you had in mind
affect GDB that is linked statically with source-highlight, and if
not, could we modify the configure script to allow that with
"-static-libstdc++"?

> > 2. Building in libctf produces the same errors I reported back in
> > February for GDB 9.1.  I thought the libctf developer fixed them
> > up-stream (or was I dreaming?), so why isn't the fix in our
> > repository?  I fixed those exactly as I fixed them for GDB 9.1.
> 
> So reading https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25155, Nick
> mentioned an RFC patch, but I can't tell if that landed.

Joel, should I install the same libctf patches we had in
gdb-9.1-branch in the current master?  Or would you like to talk to
the upstream maintainer first?

> > 3. "make TAGS" in the gdb/ directory fails because HFILES_NO_SRCDIR
> > includes files that no longer exist: gdb_select.h and
> > tui/tui-windata.h.  Once these are removed from the list, TAGS is
> > built.
> 
> This also happens on Linux. I guess few people use "make TAGS"...

Any reason not to delete those 2 file names from the list?

> > 4. Running "maint selftests" produces several warnings and failures:
> >
> >   warning: A handler for the OS ABI "Windows" is not built into this configuration of GDB.  Attempting to continue with the default i386:x86-64 settings.
> 
> Possibly related to
> https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2020-March/166678.html ?

Simon, any chance you could look into this, or instruct me how to
investigate?