Re: patch to add QNX NTO i386 support

["Kris Warkentin" <kewarken at qnx dot com>]

>    How would this work?  If the option were supplied would I append
>    remote-qnx.o to TDEPFILES?
>
> You can add to the various CONFIG_ variables, e.g. you would add
> remote-nto.o to CONFIG_OBS.  See how the CLI, MI, TUI etc. are handled
> in configure.in.
>
> Anyway, I don't consider the fact that remote-nto.o is listed in
> TDEPFILES a problem, as long as the *nto-tdep.c files don't depend on
> it.

Okay.  That seems straight forward enough.

>    The missing tm-qnxnto.h was an oversight - not necessary for the
question I
>    was asking.  The tm-nto.h file is necessary because configure will not
build
>    a native debugger without it, even if it's empty.
>
> Huh?  Are you saying that, even though you don't mention tm-nto.h in
> any of the Makefile-fragments you're adding, you need the file to
> build GDB?

Actually, NAT_FILE is nm-nto.h.  I was quite confused when I eliminated
NAT_FILE from nto.mh and all of a sudden couldn't build a native gdb
anymore.  If you look at the configure script, you'll see that if NAT_FILE
isn't defined, you never build a native gdb.  So I went 'touch nto.mh' and
added it to nto.mh.  I expect it will eventually be an empty file (once I
get rid of the single define in it).

>    I'm trying to solve a few annoying bugs (SOLIB_BKPT_NAME and
>    SVR$_EXEC_EMU) first before I submit.
>
> Fair enough.  I'm just looking forward to the end-result.

And I'd like to thank you and everyone else once again for all the help and
patience.  I really want to do this right.

cheers,

Kris