Re: Problem building GDB for sparc-rtems

[David Paterson <dnpaterson at gmail dot com>]

On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 11:39 AM, Ralf Corsepius
<ralf.corsepius@rtems.org> wrote:
> On 05/19/2011 12:11 PM, David Paterson wrote:
>>
>> Thanks Ralf - I'll change the scripts (although as you say it
>> shouldn't make a difference).
>
> All patterns in all binutils, gcc and gdb configuration scripts are supposed
> to match on "sparc-rtems*", so it should not actually matter.

Yeah, I noticed that as well, but I'll change the name for consistency with the
standard RTEMS conventions.  It'll keep us on the same page.

>>> I am building all *-rtems targets fairly frequently without many problems
>>> (cf. ftp://ftp.rtems.org/pub/rtems/linux/4.11).
>>>
>>> However gdb's dependencies are a royal pain and occasionally cause
>>> building
>>> gdb produce bizarre errors. Which host OS are you using?
>>
>> I'm using MinGW under Windows 7. If that's likely to be a problem I could
>> set up a VM for Linux.
>
> It likely is a problem.

Ah, in that case I'll switch over to a Unix environment and try that.  I'd hoped
the MinGW environment was similar enough, but there may be subtle differences.

> I am building mingw32 RTEMS packages Canadian-cross under Fedora
> c.f. http://www.rtems.org/ftp/pub/rtems/mingw32
>
> http://www.rtems.org/ftp/pub/rtems/mingw32/4.11/rtems-4.11-sparc-rtems4.11-gdb/
> contains sparc-rtems4.11-gdb-7.2
>
> (Despite the target name, these packages should also be usable with
> rtems4.10.)

I notice there's also a mingw32/4.10 directory, so I should perhaps try using
that version first.

>> It all looks OK, and the makefiles seem to be sensible, but I'll check
>> through
>> it again. ?I've done a diff between the "sparc-rtems" and "sparc-elf"
>> versions
>> of the build and nothing obvious jumps out.
>
> I have no idea. As you correctly found out, sparc-rtems*-gdb and
> sparc-elf*-gdb are almost identical.

> The only real difference is the official RTEMS packages have patches
> applied, which are not in FSF's gdb.
> Dunno, if you are using these patches - If so, timestamps could make a
> difference.
>
> However none of our patches explain your breakdown.

I am, as you guess, using the raw GCC sources to build my toolchain,
and ploughed on merrily with GDB as well.  It's possible that there is a
patch which affects this, so I'll try your patched ones and see if that
works.  If not, I'll switch to Linux and try again.

Thanks again, and I'll update once I've tried these rebuilds...

David P.