This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org mailing list for the GDB project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
2014-09-06 3:10 GMT+08:00 Joel Sherrill <joel.sherrill@oarcorp.com>: > > On 9/5/2014 12:00 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote: >>>> 2014-09-05 Chung-Ju Wu <jasonwucj@gmail.com> >>>> >>>> * configure.ac (nds32*-*-*): Disable gdb. >>>> * configure: Regenerated. >>> It looks like the part for not building gdb for or1k*-*-rtems* gets moved >>> by this patch. I know there was an issue with the initial submission of >>> that change. >>> >>> Your patch appears to correct that also. I thought the properly regenerated >>> configure had been committed. But I guess not. >>> >>> I am OK with the patch since or1k-rtems is in the same place but wanted >>> to note that the generated file had extra stuff in it for a good reason. >> We really should regenerate configure first, and then apply Chung-Ju's >> patch next. There will come a day when we will be reverting that >> patch, since hopefully GDB will be building for that target, one day. >> We don't want the revert to accidently also revert the bits that >> that resync configure with present-day configure.ac. >> Thank you for clarifying it. That also makes sense to me. :) Since you have done the configure regeneration in https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2014-09/msg00155.html , I have my patch updated as attached and ChangeLog is the same as follow: 2014-09-05 Chung-Ju Wu <jasonwucj@gmail.com> * configure.ac (nds32*-*-*): Disable gdb. * configure: Regenerated. Is the updated patch OK to commit? Best regards, jasonwucj
Attachment:
0001-Disable-gdb-for-nds32-until-it-is-supported_v2.patch
Description: Binary data
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |