GDB 7.0.90 available for testing

Ralf Corsepius ralf.corsepius@rtems.org
Mon Feb 22 07:29:00 GMT 2010


On 02/19/2010 05:52 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote:
>> I guessed as much - binutils and gcc are more restrictive, ... and
>> unless I am in error, gdb once also was :(
>>      
> I don't remember that it was, but I might be wrong.
Well, in my case, it's only the bfin which exposes this behavior.

IIRC, in case of bfin-* targets, gdb < 7's configure-scripts refused to 
buildbfd, opcodes or some other binutils subdirectory, gdb inherits from 
binutils. AFAIS, gdb >= 7.0 has inherited bfd etc. from a version of 
binutils which has been added the bfin* targets.

I.e. now, binutils' more restrictive checks don't trigger anymore.

>> Note: It did not fail at build-time - Building went absolutely
>> smoothless -- gdb crashed at run-time!
>>      
> Right - I meant run-time, not build-time.
>
> I don't feel like this is a real problem, but others might disagree.
>    
Well, it's certainly not a major issue, nevertheless it's a nuissance 
responsible for nasty surprises and thus should be addressed.

Ralf



More information about the Gdb mailing list