gdb 8.1 released

[Jiri Gaisler]

On 02/04/2018 09:59 PM, Joel Sherrill wrote:
>
>
> On Feb 4, 2018 2:35 PM, "Jiri Gaisler" <jiri at gaisler.se 
> <mailto:jiri at gaisler.se>> wrote:
>
>
>
>     On 02/01/2018 09:07 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>
>         On 31/01/18 17:54, Joel Sherrill wrote:
>
>             Hi
>
>             Perfect timing. Just as the RSB was updated and we have
>             built new tools. :)
>
>             Should we bump to 8.1? I would think it makes sense if it
>             doesn't break anything.
>
>
>         Needs the SIS patch an update?
>
>         %patch add gdb
>         https://gaisler.org/gdb/gdb-8.0.1-sis-leon2-leon3.diff
>         <https://gaisler.org/gdb/gdb-8.0.1-sis-leon2-leon3.diff>
>         %hash sha512 gdb-8.0.1-sis-leon2-leon3.diff
>         f8aa851f50feb063dd63fc10018ed638c5bd1708b6b9f5d1c1e1030c8d30a24de3506bb233cc5e7e4392ed400448b59f4c71584a22ea28878295d6d87ff79342
>
>
>     I have updated the sis path for gdb-8.1, can be downloaded from:
>
>     https://gaisler.org/gdb/gdb-8.1.sis.diff
>     <https://gaisler.org/gdb/gdb-8.1.sis.diff>
>
>
> Thanks for the quick turnaround.
>
> What's the barrier to getting this merged?

The main problem is that the sis code style that does not correspond to 
the current gdb standards. Each patch required to change/rework original 
sis code to gdb conventions. Also the change log provided with the 
patches was deemed insufficient. It was rather pain-staking to merge the 
first ~20 pathes and took many iterations with the gdb/sparc maintainer. 
I also feel that the gdb maintainers would want us to use the built-in 
simulator infrastructure more, rather than having a custom simulator 
core in sis. I have been gathering strength to go for a couple of new 
rounds with the gdb folks and try to submit the remaining ~10 patches. A 
few of the patches are however rather large (leon2/3 support), and I am 
not very optimistic on when (if ever) they will be accepted. I will do 
my best ...

Jiri.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20180204/6c864307/attachment-0002.html>