This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [patch/rfc] Don't complain about unknown OSABI
On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 04:26:52PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> >On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 01:08:39PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> >
> > > Trying to code for edge cases that can't exist yet leads to sloppiness,
> > > in my opinion. Those cases should be dealt with when we have the means
> > > to build a GDB supporting more than one processor family, and someone
> > > adds per-architecture OS/ABIs.
>
> A patch to include more than one architecture into a single gdb was
> posted a year ago :-)
I know. I observe that it isn't in yet, either.
> >FWIW, I agree 100% with Daniel.
>
> Code isn't the problem here. It's the user-gdb interface. Does the the
> user model still work if there is more than one architecture. Not
> exploring the user-gdb interaction and instead just hacking code is how
> we came to have all the CLI querks we've come to hate :-)
I'd argue (in fact, am arguing) that the user interface will be just
fine with multiple architectures, with the command as discussed, but
that the edge conditions should wait.
> Anyway, I suspect just forcing the architecture when the OSABI is
> changed is the most robust approach:
>
> >(gdb) set osabi MIPS/GNU/Linux
> >Current architecture is NS32K, change to MIPS? (y or n)
>
> ``the user is always right'' (no matter how silly it is :-).
But we don't break them down like that. The OSABI is "GNU/Linux".
> I think it is also becomming aparent that there are several OSABI involved:
>
> - the global default
> - the current instance
>
> ``set osabi'' would change the current instance.
Sure. This problem is _EVERYWHERE_ in GDB.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer