Re: ARM

[Jim Blandy <jimb at redhat dot com>]

"Larry McCourry" <lmccourry@CHARTER.NET> writes:
> Does the following not mean that it doesn't work?
> from
> http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/~checkout~/src/gdb/PROBLEMS?con
> tent-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup&cvsroot=src
> 
> ...
> 
> arm-*-*
> 
> GDB's ARM target, in 6.0, has not been updated to use the new frame
> mechanism.
> 
> Fortunatly the ARM target, in the GDB's mainline sources, has been
> updated so people encountering problems should consider downloading a
> more current GDB (http://www.gnu.org/software/gdb/current).

I think that note is a bit confusing.  It's referring to the way the
ARM back end within GDB is written, not to any directly user-visible
behavior, like being compatible with some compilers but not others.

The interfaces internal to GDB that the architecture-independent and
architecture-dependent (i.e., back end) code use to handle stack
frames have changed a lot in 6.0.  The old interfaces are mostly still
around, for compatibility with back ends that nobody has updated yet,
but the new interfaces are simpler and more reliable, so in general
one suspects that problems in stack frame management might go away if
the code were brought up to date.  I think that's what the note is
trying to say.

(If the audience for the PROBLEMS file were GDB developers, then it
would be fine as written --- we can't help but notice all the
deprecated and new gdbarch methods related to frame handling.  But if
the audience is GDB users, they'll generally have no idea what the
"new frame mechanism" is, but they'll assume they should, leading them
to conclude that it is some user-visible change they haven't heard
about.  Or at least that's what happened here.)