This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [Fwd: Is anyone using the HP compilers on PA-RISC with FSF GDB?] (fwd)
- From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>
- To: John David Anglin <dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca>
- Cc: gdb at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2006 15:21:56 -0400
- Subject: Re: [Fwd: Is anyone using the HP compilers on PA-RISC with FSF GDB?] (fwd)
- References: <200608021916.k72JGwFd002315@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca>
On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 03:16:56PM -0400, John David Anglin wrote:
> > > I have a question, though, which I think I've asked before. GCC on
> > > HP/UX uses stabs, so only requires basic SOM support from GDB. That
> >
> > There have been requests for ELF debug support. The main issue as
> > far as I can see is the lack of named sections and where to put stuff.
Do you mean DWARF-2 here? If so, I completely agree. It seems like
SOM has some named sections - at least we're managing to get objdump to
tell me there's a GDB_STRINGS section - so I don't know what the
problem is.
> > > should be in decent shape still. But the stuff read by hpread.c is
> > > only generated by the HP compilers (cc and aCC).
> > >
> > > - Are these compilers still important for C?
> > > - Are these compilers still important for C++?
> >
> > Oh, I'm sure these compilers are still important to some people.
> > However, I don't see the need to maintain support for the debug
> > format generated by these compilers. There's no debug info in any
> > of the system libraries, so this capability doesn't help development
> > of open source applications under HP-UX.
> >
> > I should also say that access to HP compilers is necessary to
> > maintain this code. Thus, it really can only be done by HP. If
> > they don't maintain it, then it should be removed.
At one point in the past, the Compaq testdrive systems offered aCC. I
don't think they do any more though.
Thanks for the response, Dave - if you don't think we need to hold on
to aCC support, then I doubt anyone else will either. However, there's
no need to rush; I'll wait for at least a few weeks, in case anyone
else has comments, and then come back to this if no one does.
> > On the otherhand, GCC C, C++, Ada and Java are now working quite well
> > on PA-RISC for both Linux and HP-UX. So, I would suggest that we need
> > to focus support in these areas. Of course, I'm a bit biased ;)
I'd be much happier working on support for GCC :-) Especially if that
means DWARF-2 debug information!
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery