From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 09:47:41 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH] gdb: convert to the package infrastructure In-Reply-To: <512F17B6.70501@imgtec.com> References: <1361916812-29395-1-git-send-email-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> <512F0EAD.4080406@mind.be> <512F17B6.70501@imgtec.com> Message-ID: <20130228094741.50f605fc@skate> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Dear James Hogan, On Thu, 28 Feb 2013 08:39:18 +0000, James Hogan wrote: > > * It really doesn't make sense to build host-gdb without a > > gdbserver for the target. So I would auto-select gdbserver from > > host-gdb. > > Kgdb (kernel debugging) is one use case where you'd want host-gdb > without necessarily gdbserver. Hum, correct. > > * Does it really make sense to keep options for four different gdb > > versions? Can't we just remove the user-selectable version > > completely? > > The option is useful for arches which don't have their gdb port > upstream yet, giving them a chance to update their patches. Not sure to follow here: Arnout mentions the choice list of gdb versions, which only have a limited number of choices already. If you need Buildroot to use some custom gdb version, then you already have to modify Buildroot anyway. Or maybe I'm missing the point you're making? Thanks! Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux development, consulting, training and support. http://free-electrons.com