gdb hangs on a 486

Randall R Schulz rrschulz@cris.com
Thu Oct 31 11:31:00 GMT 2002


Larry,

At 09:54 2002-10-31, you wrote:

>...
>
>
> >> Sounds like you may want to get the source, reconfigure, and build
> >> your own version targeting i386 or i486.
> >
> >A non-trivial job, especially if the very tools are suspect.
>
>
>A potentially non-trivial job, yes, depending on your skills and
>experience building packages.  I'm not sure what you're referring to
>by "the very tools are suspect".  These tools have been around for a
>long time.  They worked when these architectures were the default
>configuration.  It shouldn't be too hard to get them working on
>those targets now.  If you're referring to the fact that the tools
>don't check if the run-time environment matches the configuration
>environment on start-up, I think labeling the tools as "suspect" for
>this oversight is a little extreme.  But I may be missing your meaning.

It does seem there's a bootstrapping problem. If Chuck has only a 486 
machine and the only binaries he can get are compiled for post-Pentium 
architectures, how will he build compilers and binutils for his hardware?


>Larry


Randall Schulz
Mountain View, CA USA


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/



More information about the Cygwin mailing list