Re: build/1411: Build of gdb-6.0 on hppa1.1-hp-hpux10.20 fails

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>]

The following reply was made to PR build/1411; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>
To: John David Anglin <dave@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca>,
	gdb-gnats@sources.redhat.com
Cc:  
Subject: Re: build/1411: Build of gdb-6.0 on hppa1.1-hp-hpux10.20 fails
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 13:33:57 -0500

 On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 06:28:01PM -0000, John David Anglin wrote:
 > The following reply was made to PR build/1411; it has been noted by GNATS.
 > 
 > From: "John David Anglin" <dave@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca>
 > To: mec.gnu@mindspring.com (Michael Elizabeth Chastain)
 > Cc: drow@mvista.com, gdb-gnats@sources.redhat.com
 > Subject: Re: build/1411: Build of gdb-6.0 on hppa1.1-hp-hpux10.20 fails
 > Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 13:18:57 -0500 (EST)
 > 
 >  > There is no hppa*-*-linux* in configure.host.  So when I start fixing
 >  > hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.*, I'm going to introduce more divergence between
 >  > FSF gdb and Debian gdb.
 
 Actually you won't.  As I said, the Debian patches have a rewritten
 backend; they don't use any of the HP/UX code as far as I remember. 
 Which is unfortunate in a whole different way.
 
 >  I don't speak for Debian or Gentoo but I think it's up to them to
 >  keep up to date with the master source.  On the the otherhand, there's
 >  no point in introducing unnecessary divergence.  With GCC and binutils,
 >  there was a concerted effort a couple of years ago to merge the Debian
 >  changes into the FSF sources.  Alan Modra did a lot of that work.
 >  So, I think it would be worthwhile to get the current Debian patches
 >  and and merge them, or at least keep them in mind when updating
 >  hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.*.
 
 I agree, but no one has stepped forward to do this who actually has an
 interest in understanding HP/PA.
 
 -- 
 Daniel Jacobowitz
 MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer